An Ikeja High Court on Wednesday declared that the removal of the reinstated Speaker of the House of Assembly, Mudashiru Obasa, was illegal and unconstitutional.
Delivering judgment, Justice Yetunde Pinheiro, held that the members of the house of assembly erred in the removal of Obasa as speaker.
The court further awarded N500,000 in damages for the unlawful and illegal removal of Obasa and for the psychological embarrassment caused to him.
Pinheiro, also said that the plenary session which was held by the house in the absence of Obasa was invalid.
She maintained that the session was convened without Obasa’s authority or a formal delegation of power, in violation of the House’s procedures.
Pinheiro held that only the leaders of the House of Assembly had the authority to write to the Speaker to convene a meeting, and that the Chief Whip was not considered a leader for this purpose.
The court noted that under Order 7 of the House Rules, there was a defined hierarchy, and Rule 30, which related to the authority of the Chief Whip, did not confer such powers on him.
Accordingly, the court held that all steps taken toward reconvening the meeting were invalid, and that the fact a majority of members voted was inconsequential.
“The defendant cannot validly remove the Speaker without complying with Order 2, Rule 9 of the Lagos State House of Assembly Rules.
“The purported sitting of the members of the Lagos State House of Assembly, the purported removal of the claimant as Speaker, and the purported installation of the second defendant is illegal, null and void,” Pinheiro said.
Earlier, while dismissing the preliminary objections for lacking in merit, Pinheiro held that a court of law could intervene where the provisions of the constitution had not been met during any proceedings of the House of Assembly.
The court relied on Usman vs Kaduna State House of Assembly and held that “it must be noted that in cases where the constitution provides a procedure for the removal of a speaker and there is a lacuna, the court will intervene.”
The court also relied on Agbaso vs Imo State House of Assembly and the recent Supreme Court decision involving the Rivers State House of Assembly and the Government of Rivers State.
The court agreed with the claimant that the facts of the case raised justiciable issues that the court could adjudicate upon.
Consequently, the court dismissed both preliminary objections.
Obasa had on Feb. 12 filed a suit against the House of Assembly and the newly appointed Speaker, Mojisola Meranda, challenging the legality of his removal.
Obasa’s Counsel, Chief Afolabi Fashanu (SAN), contended that the speaker’s unlawful removal by 36 lawmakers occurred while the Assembly was on recess and while he was out of the country.
Fashanu urged the court to declare the process unlawful, arguing that the sitting was invalid as it was convened without the Speaker’s authority or any formal delegation of power.
His legal challenge was based on nine grounds, drawing on the interpretation of various provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as well as the Rules and Standing Orders governing the Lagos State House of Assembly.
