The National Assembly (NASS) has been dragged to court over Section 25 of the Electoral Amendment Bill which it proposed and is awaiting assent on from President Muhammadu Buhari, according to reports.
The suit was instituted by Chief Anike Nwoga, a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Chief Anike Nwoga, at the Federal High Court, Enugu on Friday, March 2, 2018 through his lawyer, Godwin Onwusi, according to Daily Post.
In a motion on notice, supported by 25-paragraph affidavit, he is praying the court for an interlocutory injunction, restraining the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria from assenting to the bill passed by the National Assembly, when it is presented to him for assent, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
The motion on notice was brought pursuant to orders 26 and 28 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009 and under the inherent jurisdiction of the Honourable court,
Listed as defendants are the National Assembly (first defendant/respondent), INEC, President Muhammadu Buhari and the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) as second to fourth defendants.
The suit prays the court to restrain the third defendant, the president, from assenting to the bill on the re-ordering of the election sequence when it is presented to him.
Covering other bases, the APC chieftain prayed for an interlocutory injunction restraining the NASS, 1st defendant, from overriding the President’s veto, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
Nwoga is asking the court to determine:
“Whether the National Assembly in the exercise of its lawmaking powers can make laws to compel INEC to exercise the powers to organize, undertake and supervise elections conferred on it by the constitution in a particular sequence.”
“Whether the National Assembly in the exercise of her law-making powers can make a law to change the sequence of elections, already adopted and published by INEC, pursuant to the powers conferred on it by the constitution.”
Upon the determination of the questions, the plaintiff urged the court to make:
“A declaration that the National Assembly cannot make laws to compel Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to exercise the powers conferred on it by the constitution to conduct election in a particular order.
“A declaration that the recent bill adopted by the two chambers of the National Assembly, which altered the sequence of the 2019 elections, already adopted and published by INEC pursuant to the powers conferred on it by the constitution, is a usurpation of the constitutional powers of INEC, hence unconstitutional.
“An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 3rd defendant from assenting to the bill changing the sequence of elections, already adopted and published by the 2nddefendant, when it is presented to him for assent.
“An order restraining the 2nd defendant from complying with the sequence contained in the bill or the Law, if assented to by the 2nd respondent.
“Any further or other orders or consequential Orders that the Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of the case.”
The court has not fixed a date for hearing of the suit yet.
