 Senate President Ahmed Lawan has said that the ruling by the Federal High Court in Abu Ja'a wouldn't stop the National Assembly from amending the Electoral Act. The court delivered a ruling on Monday by E. Young Echo. On an expatriate application by the PDP, it bad President Mohammad Ibohari, the Attorney General of the Federation, and the Senate President from tampering with the newly amended Electoral Act 2022, the court maintained that Electoral Act having become a valid law could not be altered without the following the due process of law. President Ibohari, in a letter dated 28 February 2022, requested the National Assembly to amend the Electoral Act. He drew the attention of the chamber to the provisions of section 84, subsection 12, which according to him constitutes a defect that's in conflict with extant constitutional provisions. Judge E. Young Echo, in a ruling on an expatriate application by the Opposition People's Democratic Party PDP, said the Electoral Act having become a valid law could not be altered without following the due process of law. Specifically, the court restrained President Mohammad Ibohari, the Attorney General of the Federation, and of course the National Assembly in the suit from removing section 84, subsection 12 of the Act. Can not stop off from making laws. The problem with the letter the President sent was that there was a part of it that interpreted a law and I think that is the only part that the court can act on because he said that the law we made is out of the constitution which is not his responsibility and I think to that extent the court can comment on that one but not on the fact that we're making law. I think the argument you have raised is valid but this point we present in court to distract that order. We cannot sit and appear here or appear on a matter that has already been given another in court so I think that we should exercise caution in sitting the judgment over a matter that a decision has been given or at least another has been given. What we need to do is to brief our lawyers to go and distract the other instead of sitting here and then we say that we have to be cut order. It's not good for us, it's not good for our system. That is calling for an action. Go into the exclusive preserve of the other. If the judiciary wants to come into the legislature and decide when we sit and when we don't then there's anarchy. If the judiciary will simply say we are not to consider this and that and obey those kind of rulings that is anarchy because it's emerscaling the legislature and that's not supposed to be so we will continue with what we are supposed to do because that is our calling. We are just advising that the judiciary should please help us develop this democracy because this arm of government is the least developed.