 Welcome back, it's still the breakfast and plus TV Africa time now to talk some politics. As part of its last-minute efforts to stave off any possible violation of the Electoral Act, the ruling all-progressive Congress APC has given a deadline to cabinet members and all the executive appointees at both the state and federal levels, within which they must resign their appointments if they intend to participate in its forthcoming round-up primary elections. According to the set of guidelines for the primaries, their appointees now have to, this Saturday, to quit their present offices. As part of this, a lot of people will be affected. The Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amici and all the ones who have a political appointment will be affected by this particular development. So just how far will they really go? We have two analysts joining us to look at all of that. We have John Gaule, a liberal, and Festus Tecumbo. Many thanks for joining us gentlemen on this particular discourse. All right, one would have thought that it would be the moral thing to do, knowing that you are in government and that you have intentions to the contest for the elections of next year. Ordinarily, the writing to be done will be to resign. Do you agree with that? No, I think so. Just like you said, it is a moral thing to do. It is a moral thing to do, it is a constitutional thing to do. The problem is that Nigerians are finding it very easy to lift the moral body. So a lot of our leaders lack that conscience, they lack that moral obligation to always comply with issues as these. But that said, I think the main problem here has been the confusion between the last amendment of the Electoral Act and the fact that the Attorney General had taken steps to procure a court order from Anabia State, Federal High Court, to try to nullify or make military deprivation of that Electoral Act. And then when that order was served, the National Assembly still went ahead and continued with the process of the amendment of that act. And I think also they procured an order of state of execution at the Court of Appeals. So I think in between that judgment and the state of execution and the additional National Assembly to continue with the amendment, I'm sure most members of the Federal Executive Council were hoping that that provision will not take effect. And particularly the Attorney General who we suspect was behind that court order from the Abia Federal High Court, you know, were also hoping that that provision of 30 days to the primaries to resign will not take effect. But obviously, because the National Assembly has passed the law because of the state of execution by the Court of Appeal, and that provision has taken effect, I'm sure they are court mapping. I'm really surprised that somebody who is the Law Officer of the Federation, the Attorney General of the Federation, will not appreciate or understand the implication of such a provision. I'm also surprised that key members of the Federal Executive Council, we've been written here, Metri, who is my colleague, having said that Speaker, two-time Speaker of the River Stickers of Assembly, will not understand the implication of Our firsts to Kumbo, are you still there with us? Firsts, can you hear us? All right, mercy, these are part of the discussions we were having, you know, drain of the press legal versus morality and all of that. And remember candidly, or vividly rather, is he going to talk specifically about the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, who should know the right thing but is actually contesting that particular session in court? So, you know, apart from the fact that, you know, you have a morality conversation, you also need to look at what the party guideline says. Now, a section of, you know, the party guideline for the APC Section 3, I of the APC guideline for the nomination of candidates for 2023, general elections says no political appointee. At any level shall be given voting delegate or be voted for the purpose of nomination of candidate, any political office holder entrusted in contesting for an active office shall leave the office 30 days prior to the date of the election or to party primary for the office sorted. And let's not forget that you're going to have, you know, the party primary is for the APC that is slated for the 30th through the 31st of May. And so, that's a lot, but it brings us back to the conversation of how far have we respected our laws because we have laws. I mean, if we talk about a lot of laws, if we have implemented half of the laws that we have in this country, if we obey our laws, I'm not sure that, you know, Nigeria will be where it is today, not just to the ruling class, I mean the elite at this point in time. You also want to talk about the, you know, the followership. So this, you know, the conversation is very encompassing. We've seen a couple of times, I mean, several times where you have the president not adhering to several laws. I mean, there are different times where you have prominent persons. We seem to always obey the parts of the constitution or any guideline that suits our interest and concern. I don't know if you do have, you know, John Gall level or, you know, other guests. Okay. But as soon as we're able to have our guests join us, we continue the conversation. So it's encompassing. The issue of now you have the ministers. The ministers are saying that they're not going to resign. But the commissioners are actually resigning. No, not that's at the state level now. So at the state level, you have a lot of compliance. And some of the persons who are going to be contesting for elective, you know, offices and positions, attend during their resignation. Well, then you now come to the federal level. Some of these ministers are saying, hey, we're not resigning. For instance, you have, you know, Chris Singigay saying he's not gotten a letter, he's not been, you know, given that letter and asked to resign at the end of the day. So, but when you ask yourself, don't you think that this is actually the impunity that we constantly talked about? And do we have a system that can purge itself of all of this disobedience and not, you know, disregard for, you know, the law at the end of the day. So, but my fingers across, let's see what begins to happen. I mean, if you also have the attorney general of the federation, I'm not mistaken, correct me if I'm mistaken. It's also on that particular list. Right. So he should be the constable, you know, of the law at this point in time. That's why he's contesting it in court. All right, we'll take a quick break and when we come back, we'll talk some more, stay with us. Let's see the breakfast on plus CV Africa. We do have our guests on standby. I assume John Gall label who joins the conversation and festus to combo who's also on standby. Thank you once again, gentlemen, for being part of the show this morning. Okay. So, so let's bring in Mr. Festus to combo at this point. Mr. Festus, can you hear us? All right. So, so let's look at it now. So, for the guideline of the APC, he also talks about the fact that if they're sick, any political office, they need to tender direct ignition 30 days before this. And you have the minister saying they're not going to resign. What do you make of this? I mean, scenario. What do you make of the situation? Thank you for your for your for having me in your in your life show. You see, you see, there are two basic instruments that governs the general relations in Nigeria, the body constitutions and the electoral art of 2022 and the parties, parties, guidance, the driving guidance. And he stipulated in this document that political parties must must resign before 30 days before the general election, before the presidential election. So, so they have no option. They have to resign at their appointment because the beauty of democracy is a law. It's equal before the law. So no one should be more important or more powerful than the constitution. So they have to resign. They have no options. That's my opinion. So in in a case where they're like they have, I mean, they have rightly stated that they insisted they're not, you know, tendering, they're not going to tender their resignation. What will be the implication of that, looking at the primaries and also the general election? The National Assembly passed the Electoral Amendment law in February 2022 that stated that the political parties must resign before the general election. So they have to. They can't take the country to ransom, you know, because of their political ambitions. And in any way, they are not being deprived of contesting, you know, because by allowing appointees to conduct a general election, they can do some leverage in terms of influence of what they let to it. It will not be a fair election anymore. What is the consequence? All right. But looking at all of that, one would have thought that, you know, for someone like the Minister of Justice, who is also nursing ambition, you know, to run for elective office, he would actually know what the law says, because judging by the APC new guidelines, they have 30 days to do that. But he's actually contestant. That particular section of the Constitution, that some section 84, subsection 12, what does this really tell of people who should understand the law? The question goes, does the Minister of Justice, this is more powerful than the President that signed the bill into law in February, that stated that the appointees, the political parties must resign before the general election. I mean, it's not done anyway, you know, in our country. They just have to resign. They cannot manage the political engineering for their interests. The interests of 200 million people should be paramount down the interests of few politicians that are trying to shame the laws. Are you getting it? Yeah, go ahead. I can hear you. Go ahead. Yeah. So, I mean, this is not something that is to be up for public debate, because the Constitution is paramount. It's not something that you're up for public debate, you know. The court, the case is the court, but we can't, I mean, the election is just by one year from now. We cannot wait for a case that cannot be decided because we have to go with the Constitution. We have to go with the Electoral Act, that was amended in February, 2022. That's it. All right, so let's have John Goh level at this point. John Goh, so what happens if you don't have these politicians, I mean, those who are aspiring to become president or governors on what have you at the APC, I mean, at the party level tendering their resignation, what will happen? What becomes of, you know, the primaries? Will they be asked not to be part of it? What's going to happen? We'll like to share your thoughts on that. Okay, I think the implication is very clear. By the provision of the Constitution of both parties, the two major parties, EDP and the APC, by the provision of the Electoral Act, you know, resignation is a precondition to qualification to run the elections. So for instance, if the original of the federation does not resign, check it is to the primaries, he will not be screened by the party as a electoral panel because each of the political parties also has a screening process. That screening process, this is certificate of qualification to contest the primaries. It is only after you have been screened, you get the certificate of screening that you can take part in the primaries. And when you win the primaries, your name will be forwarded to INE. Now, the implication of contravening the provision of the Constitution requiring all political opponents to resign is that any political party who does not resign will not be screened by the screening committee of the political party. And the screening committee of the political party is your first level of trying to get your candidates to be, your candidates who eventually will be nominated to be duly qualified in the sense that they are not duly qualified. The other party, after the nomination has been signed to INE, will take the party to court and you lose your candidate. And by the time you lose your candidate at the point of nomination, you cannot replace them. A typical example is what happened in Zanfarah State where APC won the House of Assembly, House of District and Gobernatorial elections. And they lost all because of lack of qualification of the candidate. In that case, it was because instead of doing indirect primaries, indirect primaries and all of that, and the primaries was taken to Abu Dhabi instead of Zanfarah State. So that's what you find. The party is trying to put together a first hold with an internal cleaning system. The internal cleaning system is to ensure that all of our candidates within the party are qualified. They have complied first with the position of our constitution. They complied the position of the electoral and the position of the constitution before they are duly nominated. Don't forget that the political party is entitled to nominate one candidate among his best material. So by the time you bring up the authority of the federation as Gobernation Candidate for Tabis State, having not complied with the position of the APC constitution and the electoral and PDP who just waits, once his name is nominated, they're going to cut the sector aside. And then APC will not have a candidate in that election. That is the implication. And I think that from my experience, no political party will take the risk. Because the risk that I also have an insurer, you don't have a backup plan, once your primaries go on and the winner of that primaries, you cannot also replace the winner of the primaries. You know, if there's no police side and you go ahead to seal in for that primaries and get the nomination, PDP will wait on the left side. Or in the case, maybe APC will also wait on the left side. And then you're going to use the nomination. So but at the end of the day, let's also look at this now. Do you think that there are any lacunas, you know, in the electoral act or the party constitution or the constitution itself that these individuals, these appointees, can actually challenge, you know, go to court to challenge the process? Well, I think that it's not a question of lacuna, it's a question of interpretation. You know, the difference between the legislature and the executives is that where the legislature has a responsibility to pass the law, it is the responsibility of the judiciary to interpret the law. And so that is why usually in law, we say that the transparency of what they call to say in fact and nothing more pretentious is what we mean by the law. Now what that means is that no matter the position of the constitution, sometimes they highlight the summary or the legal imprisonment of the constitution or of any statutory provision of the constitution, comes out clearly by better expression by the judiciary. So what I see happening here is that from the provision of the electoral act, the provision of the party constitution, what the attorney general of the federation is trying to do, is to try to get an interpretation that seems to the fact that they are not entitled to resign. Counting on the provision of the interpretation, which is also a law of the fed, one of the laws of the federation. Now, we need the interpretation and they are trying to imply that a political appointee is not entitled to resign, that they are not among the bracket of their appointees that should resign. Which the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal have already pronounced on who is a public officer. The electoral act is said on its own in the interpretation provision of the electoral act has defined with the public officer. The constitution of the federal public on its own has defined with the public officer. The constitution of the APC on its own in the interpretation provision has defined with the public officer. The interpretation has lost its definition as defined who is a public officer. And a public officer is anybody, a public officer differentiated with the political appointee. A political appointee is a person whose rules is appointment at the mercy of the elected officer. For instance, the president of the federal public of Nigeria, all the ministers are all political appointees. The commissioners in the state appointed by the governor are all political appointees. Public officers are civil servants. There are different repetitions to it, but I think what they are trying to push for now is to say that they are public officers and not political appointees, which will not move water. The law is very clear. The Court of Appeal decision is a supreme constitution to that interpretation. All right, let's have your final thought on that. First, if you're still there on this particular discourse, what do you think lies ahead for those political appointees who are affected? First of all, I don't make the comment about what my colleagues said about that political appointees claim to be a public officer. The law recognizes them as political appointees. And the appointment is at the mercy of the appointees, which represents the government. So they cannot claim to be political officers. And at the end of the day, the constitutions have to be interpreted. But I mean clearly stated that the political appointees, they have to seek public offices, have to resign before the relations. So that is what I feel is going to be the case at the end of the day. They are trying to see what the machine below, shame the practices and get their opinion. And shame the political interests. So quickly, let's also bring John Gull. This probably might just be the last for us here. What's really different now? At the time where you also contested, I mean you were still a political office holder and you never had to tender your resignation. So what is different now? I was elected. For instance, the difference is that three things. First, public officers are civil servants. Political appointees are appointed at the mercy of the governor or the president or the chairman of the local government as the case may be. And their tenure is tied to the tenure of the governor, the minister, the governor, the president of the chairman of the local government. In my own case, I was elected for a fifth period as the member of the House of Assembly. I was elected for four years. So from May 2019 in the first year to May 2019, the fourth year. The same reasoning the president was running for his second term, he would not return because his tenure is guaranteed by the Constitution for four years. That's why President Buhari, having been elected in May 2019, May 2019, May 2019, May 20, 2015. Then the person in office They have the M6 by the constitution for four years, and within that four years, they cannot resign. It's either at the content of the election and we can return back after the second when you get a bad tenure, or you lose your election and leave the office. So elected officers don't resign. It is appointed officers who resign. So should we not also consider elected officers resigning? No, because that would be wrong because the tenure of the elected officers is not heard at the MSE of an appointment. It is heard at the provision of the constitution that guarantees it, you know, the four years. So you cannot terminate the four years in between. Bob Ayos? If you are entitled, if you are second term, like in the case of a governor, who is entitled to get a second term after they will get another term, that second term will terminate on the date of his inauguration, the anniversary of his inauguration. So a governor is elected into office, for instance, in May 2019. His tenure will terminate in May, 29, 2019. His tenure will terminate in May, 29, 2023. Within that period, if he's entitled to a second term, the constitution, the electoral and the constitutional party allow him, while in office, to seek for a second term because his tenure still exists has not been terminated by a virtue of the provision of the constitution. All right, we'll just leave it at that. Big thank you to public affairs analyst, John Gore, Libo, and of course, Amfestos Tocumbo. Thanks for the thoughts that you have shared today. We do appreciate it. Thank you, Dr. Fibilish. Thank you so much for being part of the show. But Justin, just before we move away from this, don't you think that, you know, it's a good thing that was saying that let's have disappoints is tender to your resignation. And the question for me was don't we, or shouldn't we consider elected officers also tendering their resignation because we understand the dynamics. I mean, the role that, you know, the power of incumbency has always played for every other elections. And so beyond the, you know, all of the externals, I mean, all of the things that we know, but we also understand the power of influence. I mean, some persons have put it that constantly you have this persons wanting control using state resources, you know, to their own personal interests. Oh yeah, well true, because that's very debatable because some people would say that, fine, haven't been enough is, still been enough is rather, and you're thinking of contesting that you might not really channel all your resources, all your time and energy on government and governance. There's this talk that they might want to divert government money into the campaign and the election process. And that would actually affect, you know, the people at the end of the day. Well, it is still debatable, but there's this, there's still the constitution which has actually guaranteed them, you know, the rightful four years to be treated. But the constitution was made by man and for man. And that's it. All right, we'll take it away from here. We'll come back, we'll look at politics still, but in another direction. This time I will be focusing on a drug integrity test in a moment. We'll join us again.