 Lawmakers react to the ruling on section 84, subsection 12 of the electoral act, asking Abu Bakr al-Malami against its implementation. And the president accuses the People's Democratic Party of plotting to destabilize Nigeria. This is Ms. Blasphaltex and I'm Kofi Battels. Welcome to Plus Politics, I'm Kofi Battels and let's move to fast the story for discussion tonight on the program, the Nigerian Senate and indeed the House of Representatives have responded to the judgment of a federal high court in Umuahia Abia State that nullified the section 84, subsection 12 of electoral act 2022. While the senators vowed to appeal the judgment, the representatives cautioned the Attorney General and the Federation in Minnesota of Justice Abu Bakr al-Malami, S.A.N. against its implementation, saying that this would deny the national right of appeal as they called it. Now this is because the court had ordered the Attorney General of the Federation to delete the set subsection 12 of section 84 from the body of the electoral act and reacting to the judgment of the House of Rep, the judgment of the court, the House of Representatives condemned the judgment and resolved to formally write a letter of complaints to the National Judicial Council, the NJC joining us to discuss this, we'd like to say we have a member of the House of Representatives, Rima Shaulou, represents the people of Takum, Donga, Usa and Yangtu Federal constituency in Tarabah State, Honorable Shaulou. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you very much for having me here. All right, despite the introduction we've given, I want you to run our viewers through what transpired on the floor of the House of Representatives when this issue was brought up for discussion. Well, I was not on the floor of the House yesterday when it happened, but the feeling of the House and the feeling of most people who have read the judgment is that it's a judgment that marks up what people have been complaining about in the Nigerian political system, mainly that politicians are trying to bring the judiciary into dispute. There is no reason whatsoever for the court, for instance, to enter into, to accept that case, the way it was accepted, to give an order against a party that was not a party to the suit and to order further that the executive should perform the duties of the legislature by going to delete a section of the Electoral Act. What the Honorable Court should have done or should have stopped that would have been simply to say in his opinion that the section of the constitution was null and void to the extent of its inconsistency to a specific section of the constitution. But he didn't do that. And people are wondering why the judgment, where the case was not entered into in Abu and where the National Assembly is and why the National Assembly was not joined as a party to the case in the case that National Assembly is a direct participant. Now, the facts of the matter is what we have tried to do in the National Assembly is to sanitize the political system to try to build institutions. You do not, when you build institutions of democracy, institutions that we stand prejudiced and so it is very disconfident and it's very, it is really not nice at this stage for the judiciary or some people in the judiciary to come to participate in politics of the country. If you are interested in contesting election, it should be their procedure for contesting election. And the National Assembly is empowered by the constitution of the ground norm of the country to make laws for the country, to make laws for the electoral system, which is why so much pressure was put on the National Assembly to make sure that the electoral act was passed. That is why several forms of compromises were reached and the president in his wisdom signed the electoral act and also sought for an amendment to the electoral act. If the president would request the National Assembly to do the amendment, where was the executive? Where was the minister in a worry to go to court to procure a court judgment that will enable him, as people are alleged, to contest election? If he is interested in contesting election, he is well within his right and need to contest election. He might as well simply go straight to resign to contest election. Nobody stops him from contesting election. But you cannot sit in your office, an office that is supposed to be an impartial umpire to be taking political actions, company, and it doesn't give respect to that office. And that is not the intention of the constitution. Okay. Are you saying President Muhammad Buhari is not in charge of a country? Are you saying that he lacks the capacity to rule the country and he doesn't know what is going on, that he's probably even mentally incapacitated? Because what you're alleging is that everything that's happening is simply a script of Malami being played out, the Attorney General and means of justice. Despite the fact that we know that a lawyer and top member of Action Alliance, Undukai Dide, was the one who filed the suit to challenge the constitutionality of the provision included in the electoral act. You insisting that this was orchestrated by Malami simply because he wants to contest the next elections and doesn't want to resign from office earlier than 30 days. So it therefore means that the President doesn't know what is going on and maybe he's not aware of what's happening is being controlled by Malami, which means that he's not capable of governing the country. Is that what you're saying? No, that's what you are saying. I did not reach that conclusion. You reached that conclusion. Because my conclusion is simply this, that the Minister of Justice or any other person who is in government, including the persons that Undukai and Ko are promoting to contest for the presidency of this country, have a right to contest, but they need to do the needful. Simply resign before they contest. And of course, the President, I believe, will call whoever is trying to do this to caution because he's done that a few times. Now, the issue of the President's ability to rule and people within his government taking actions or laws into their hands are completely two different things. And I believe that the people who are promoting this, the people do not wish this country well. For instance, it's simply for a sitting central bank governor anywhere in the world to want to contest election. One sitting on the center, one sitting on top of the central bank is what can only happen in a place where people are taking laws into their hands. Because what you are going, what you are saying, what you are telling the people, investors, and everyone that is interested in the economy, that you are going to ruin the economy, it goes to caution, it brings into doubt. But honorable Shaulou, I'm going to say the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria has already said that he's not interested in running for office. He's already said that those who are peddling his name didn't have his approval. Even his friends also came out to help him amplify his rejection of visa. Well, if he did say that, it is good. He did say that because what I would have said if he does not deny this, is to ask the president to remove him or ask him to resign. Because those people who went to court, or the names of some of the people who went, are the same people that are promoting his candidature. And that is simply against the economy, it's an economic sabotage for a sitting governor of the central bank to double into politics, or people around him to double into politics. What does that mean? That every action that he has taken so far and meant to achieve a political end. What is the implication of that to the people who want to invest in the economy? So back to the earlier point I mentioned, but I think you've, as I've just said, got him affiliates tonight, those being behind the calls for him to be president, or to join the political free. But you're insisting and you're saying that Malami is behind all of this. And I go back to that question. What I'm saying is that you said a few minutes ago, you said that Malami was interested in running for office. That's why he's pushing this. But Mr. President. I think he's interested in running for office. He should resign. Yeah, he is he. That the judge does not, cannot give instruction to him to go and perform a legislative function. All right. And if he dares to perform a legislative function, it means that he has an interest. Okay, but President Buhari wrote to the National Assembly and sent a bill to you requesting the deletion or the amendment of that section, 84 subsection 12. So would it be fair on Malami to say he is behind all of this? Well, that is for him to come out to speak for himself, number one. And number two is for him also to refuse to perform legislative functions and wait for the process as enshrining the constitution to take place. What is the process as enshrining the constitution? That if the president objects to any legislative proposal from the National Assembly, he vetoes the legislation. If he on the other hand signs it and he decides at a later time to send a letter to the National Assembly asking for an amendment. He's within his right to do that. Then they should wait for the legislative process to be concluded. You did talk about, I'm sure we have accepted, you recognize that it was an individual Nigerian, not a member of government, a lawyer and top member of the Action Alliance by the name Unduka Dede, who approached the court in Umuahe Abia State. At some point you said he seems to be... No, my listening to me, we've known this from 1993. We've known this from the case of Anogen that when you see somebody go to court, there's somebody behind him that's asking him to go to court. Like the association for better Nigeria, who went to get the 1993 election and all. He was not acting, he was not an independent person. And would you, for instance, any ordinary citizen go to the crowded courts today and get judgment within a few days and get the court to listen to you within a few days? It's been happening, especially in political cases, you have some swift rulings. In political cases, it means that some political interests are pushing it. Okay, so you mentioned, you did say at a point on Rosh Aulul, that there's someone who Unduka, the plaintiff, the one whose father is Yutrara, whose interest he is trying to protect, the person who wants to be president. Can you give us insight into who you're referring to? No, no, no, I didn't say that. No, you mentioned you said whoever Unduka is. I did not say that. You should ask, I did not say there's a particular question. I did not say that. There are interests. And whoever goes to court, you, can you go to court today, file a case today and get the judgment tomorrow? It's happened several times, especially in political cases. Okay, to try and do one, that's it. No, but you're aware it's been happening, especially in political cases. And you will get judgment. The issue is this, that if we want to please the political system, a lot of things have been happening. Cases have been filed, for instance, well over one year, for people who come from their political parties to other political parties, courts have not got judgment. We have not got judgment on most of them yet. Most of them have not got to the stage of judgment. And then Electoral Act, that was signed by the president a few days ago, now we've got judgment. Doesn't it start to reason that there is something, there is something, and it is a responsibility, therefore, for those who do investigation like you, or people who are producing the program, to find out, call the person who came, who are those, who went to court. Why did you go to court? Who are those behind you? I don't know, Shaulie. Did you get the money? I'm sure, I'm sure. And then you go to his bank accounts, you go to his bank accounts, and find out where they got the money to. So are you saying that Undukah Edede was bribed? I don't know, I don't know. Are you alleging that also, the trial judge was also bribed as well? I don't know, I don't know. You're talking about Milord, the Honourable Justice Ayah Dike. Are you saying she was bribed by Undukah Edede? Is that what you're saying, sir? That is what you are saying. No, because you will say we should check bank accounts. That is what you are saying. That's what you are saying. Honourable Shaulie, whose bank accounts are you saying we should go check? Go and check the Undukah's account. Where he got the money to file the case. All right, are you also saying that... You should do some investigation. Yes, I'm writing it down. Are you also saying that... Also go and find out, for instance, go and find out where the cases that were filed by the PDP long ago, in River State and some other states, about members who come from PDP have not been heard. Honourable Shaulie, it's something you're trying to, a message you're trying to pass through, is it something you know that we don't know? So can you spill the beans for us? Just say... I don't have beans to spill. I thought you wanted to say that. Because you're speaking in parables. I'm not speaking in parables. If you have something you want to say, you can say them. It seems there's something you're aware of that you feel not free to say. Don't say what you want to say through me. All right, all right. But let's move on. If they have something to say, you say it. No, you're making some innovations and telling us to go check, which means you have some information. Or you're telling us to go find out some things. So why, why cases were stopped? So is it something you know about these things that may be wrong? If you know, maybe you can just make a job easy and tell us. Why don't you say it? I've told you what you should find out. That cases are in court that have not been heard. And this case is too fast for it to be heard. Why have those cases not been heard? I don't know. Okay, what about the element of time? And I do know that in jurisprudence, that some of these considerations are brought to bear. We're aware of the electoral election timetable. We're aware of the fact that election is just around the corner, less than a year from now. We're aware that there was this clamor for the president. A process of amendment, of constitution, for the president to sign the electoral act, because of the element of time. And INEC, even through its national commission of voter education, Faisal Sokoe, had been crying and saying, we need the electoral act passed quickly because we are running out of time. So is it impossible that the trial judge, Milo Justice, what's her name again, Anya Dike, looked at the time frame, said, okay, this is a time bound case. So let's hear it. Because we need to be done with this because election is around the corner. And whatever INEC does is guided by the act. So are you being fair, Mike? Is that what the judge told you? No, but these are the things they look at, sir. I'm sure you're aware of this. So is that the basis for not joining the national assembly as a party to the case? You were talking about the fact that the case was sent too quickly. Is that the reason why the national assembly was not joined as a party to the case? I don't know. I don't know. But I'm asking you. So I don't know too. Because you said the case was heard too quickly. And I said there's an element of time that is considered by the judge. Is that what the judge told you? If the judge told you there is an element of time, the national assembly is going to appeal. I don't know. I'm asking you. Okay. All right, sir. I'm asking you too. I don't know. That's why you're here, I guess. I'm asking the questions. But I mean, so why would the judge, you know, of the standing of the Honorable Justice Anya Dike of the Federal High Court in Muahia, first struck such a case, you think? Well, I don't know. You should go and ask the judge. No, because you seem to be having some issues with that. So are you okay with the speed with the judgment with which it was heard? Honorable, you were seated then. You were raising questions on the character of the judge. So I'm asking you, what do you think? Yeah, I'm also raising questions about the, I'm also raising my questions. I'm also asking you, if you have gone to the judge and is that what the judge said in the judgment? So why do you think Madam Mrs. Anya Dike was very quick with this? I don't know what she said. I don't know anything about her motive. But I'm saying that there's a process for amendment of the Constitution that should be followed. All right. All right. Let's look at some insinuations. This has been the journey talking about the amendment. Can we go ahead? Yes, this has been the journey talking about the amendment of the electoral act. You've had sort of a battle between the House of Representatives. It's not a battle, but this is what has been playing out between the House of Representatives and the Senate and the National Assembly on one side and the Governors on the other side. And the National Assembly came up with the issue of direct primaries and this was rejected. The President sent the bill back to the House. The Governors also went to see him and voiced their strong rejection of this and they didn't want to have this in the bill. The Senate President also was a frequent visitor to the presidential villa along with the Speaker of the House of Rep. So it was evident that you had both sides going for something different. Some have said that the National Assembly members are simply trying to ensure themselves with this amendment of the electoral act. And they don't want the powers in the state to be against them. This time we're talking about the state governments. What do you say to that? Well, my take about it is I don't believe that it is right for us to have just one format of conducting primaries of selecting people who contest selection. It's democracy. There are places they do, there are places in the world they do primaries, there are places they don't do primaries. There are areas that parties go shopping for people who will contest elections and it's a second place, it takes place in many areas. So the President, in my opinion, is routine his powers, routine his right, and I think it's also a good process to have a consensus candidate, to have people that want to do direct, people that want to do indirect by delegates. They are all proper and I believe that it is right that they are in the electoral act. Of course, I would have wished that we did not put the stringent conditions that we put in the electoral act on signing, having candidates signed agreements and so forth because people can't just abuse it by going to buy forms when they don't intend to contest election but just create crisis within political parties. The fact of the matter is that political parties are safe governing entities and must remain safe governing entities with their rules, with distinct characteristics. You cannot have parties being uniform, doing things the same way. I see what happened under their batches when the former Attorney General of the Federation described political parties as the five lepros fingers of a batch. We cannot do that. Parties have to choose the way they want to do things. Talking about members of National Assembly wanting to fight their way, political elections all over the world, there is no section, no one section of the polity determines what happens in any political party. Every interest has to be taken care of and people, whether they are members or not, have to cooperate with people at home, with people everywhere before they go ahead with winning any elections. You cannot sit in a budget and win any election. You have to go back home. And if you go back home, you need to get people to help you win elections. So the question, therefore, that National Assembly members want to fight their governors is just mischief. No member of National Assembly that I know will want to go and be fighting his governor. The governor has different duties and responsibilities. National Assembly members have different duties and responsibilities. What does happen is simply political. Some people will go to the governor who is a major stakeholder in any state to ask to discredit members. Members of National Assembly is a normal thing. And if some members of National Assembly have their way, they will go to their governors or other stakeholders to discredit the other people. So question of saying, members of National Assembly are doing this because they want to fight. Why will you fight your governor? You are supposed to work with the governor to improve the state. So the issue, therefore, is that people should not be afraid of election. People should not be afraid. Election, there are two things. You win or you lose. Today, you win. Tomorrow, you lose. Or today, you lose. Tomorrow, you win. Or you retire from politics. So the issue, therefore, for me, is that we need to clean up an electoral process. And I'm very happy with the recent court judgments on the campaign. People moving from their political parties. It's been so difficult for people outside Nigeria to understand why somebody is in one party to get moral rights in another party. Yeah. Yeah. Honorable Sholou, thank you. But the House of Reps has no reply. Sad very strong words for the Umbu Justice IRDK and has reported her to the National Judicial Council. It's a clear case of the judge saying that the Nigerian constitution stipulates that appointees of government seeking to contest elections must resign at least 30 days to the date of election. And she also went to say that any other law mandating such appointees to resign or to leave office at any time before that 30 days is unconstitutional, invalid, illegal, null, and void to the extent of its inconsistency with the very clear prohibitions of the constitution. And you are very aware of this, Honorable. No, no, no, no. You are very aware of this. That is a very, very, very poor routine of the constitution. The constitution, there are processes of election. The fact that you resign from, the fact that you contest primaries does not mean you are going to contest the election. So the law is talking about people resigning from their positions to contest general elections. The National Assembly is talking about resigning to participate in primaries. They're not the same and cannot be construed to be the same. Aren't the primaries part of the election electionary processes? No, you can contest the primaries. Sorry, sir. It's not everybody that contests the primaries that contests the general election. Yes, but I'm saying that it's part of the election. So the law is talking about the constitution. The constitution is talking about contesting the elections as conducted by any. The parties as self-government associations have the right to make their rules about the conduct of their members and cannot take it away from the parties. So the parties are saying that, the National Assembly is saying that for the purpose of primaries, you need to vacate your office so that you participate in the primaries. What, why is that the case? Primaries, primaries is not the same. Yes, why the focus by the National Assembly on primaries in particular? That is saying they cannot be delegates. You're saying they cannot vote or be voted for. Why the focus of primaries is not the election? Why in some places, for instance, maybe you don't know, there are 1,000 appointees of a governor who will add the number of party officials that are entitled to participate in the process. Would that be a fair and fair election? Does that develop the political parties? When you are talking about the legal system, about the institutions, you are talking about building institutions that can stand the test of time. Now, there is no room about the number of political appointees that can be appointed. Someone, it happened between 1999 and some day that towards election, some governors appoint up to 1,000, 2,000 political appointees so that their numbers can influence and distort the elections. That is not fair. That destroys the political parties. What happens to the people who have been holding political offices without salary for all this period that they don't have a say in who should go and contest election? So there's a reason why National Assembly did that. It's been abused and abused and abused and abused. And so for the purpose of primaries, if you want to participate in primaries, leave your political appointment and go and face it. If you finish and you fail, you may be reappointed by your boss. But for now, the law is that you cannot participate if you are a political appointee, be a delegate. Why should people be holding party offices and then they are not qualified to be delegates? Thank you very much. Thank you very much. We have to go. I'm sure a lot of Nigerians will want to see this same energy by the members of the National Assembly when it comes to issues that do not directly affect their political fortunes. Honourable Rima Shaulou, thank you very much. He's a member representing Takum Yomal Ousah. There is a code, there is a code below the belt. Thank you very much. Thank you very much sir. It's been a pleasure having you. And I mean, if you've done so well to answer all the questions, I look forward to having you again. Thank you for your time sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for staying with us on plus politics. We'll take a short break now and when we return we'll discuss the APC alleging that the People's Democratic Party is planning to destroy the country. We'll be right back.