Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Femi Falana has provided commentary on the legal nuances pertaining to the 27 MPs in Rivers State who are involved in a political dispute. CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>
During an interview on Sunday Politics on Channels Television, Falana emphasized the difficult task of persuading the court to allow the MPs to continue serving in the legislative chamber.
According to Falana, the crux of the matter lies in whether the affected lawmakers are willing to seek a renewal of their mandate from the people.
He asserts that without a clear demonstration of this intent, it may prove arduous to sway the court in favour of their continued occupancy within the house.
Referencing a legal precedent, Falana points to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Abegunde and the Labour Party.
He stated that this landmark decision serves as a cornerstone for understanding the legal framework governing such situations.
Falana emphasises the importance of this precedent in shaping the court’s perspective on the matter at hand.
The crux of Falana’s argument rests on the principle of democratic legitimacy.
He suggests that lawmakers facing similar circumstances must be prepared to validate their position through a fresh mandate from the electorate.
According to Falana, without this validation, their claim to continued occupancy in the legislative house may be tenuous in the eyes of the court.
Falana said, “I do hope that those who are affected by the order will like to urge the court to have another look at the case.
“However, it may be very difficult to persuade the court to allow them (the lawmakers) to remain in the legislative house unless they are prepared to go back to the people and have their mandate renewed by the people.
“So that is the position of the law, and the Supreme Court has made this point clear in the case of Abegunde and the Labour Party.” CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>
Leave a Reply