After the Judgment

This is a dangerous precedence, and I must add that our parliament must quickly amend the constitution. The danger inherent in this is that, as soon as another government is installed, so long as the VP have the support of the house, he can change party and continue to remain in the opposition, simply because his allegiance is not to the President but the constitution. What a flaw in our constitution! Anyway, I want to believe that the supreme court will right this error of judgment.
That was my comments on Nairaland on the Appeal Court judgment that Atiku should remain the VP. It was a dissappointing judgment and leave a very bad taste in the mouth.
To confirm my fears, Chief Gani Fawehinmi wrote to shows his own dissatisfaction on the rulings too. Hear him.
"I completely disagree with that decision which I consider to be constitutionally wrong, illegally untenable, technically illogical and politically dangerous for the sustenance of the nation's peace, order and good government. It is also capable of taking integrity out of politics, particularly party politics.
"The judgment is laden with disturbing consequences. For instance, if the President who is Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) dies today, the Vice President who was Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) but now of Action Congress becomes the President by virtue of Section 146(1) of the Constitution.
"He will then appoint an Action Congress (AC) Vice President subject to the confirmation of the National Assembly. He will also appoint Action Congress (AC) Ministers to administer the affairs of the nation with him. But the electorate did not vote in 2003 for an Action Congress (AC) President.
"Equally, the electorate did not vote for the programmes of the Action Congress (AC) as there was no Action Congress (AC) in 2003.
"Clearly, by Section 224 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, every party must have a programme.
"At the moment, Atiku Abubakar is competent by this decision to attend the Federal Executive Council meeting as Vice President armed with the political, economic and social programme of the Action Congress (AC). What a new constitutional disorder!
"The decision of the Court of Appeal has spelt the death knew of the institution and constitutional importance of political parties as the basis of our constitutional democracy.
"In this respect, the Court of Appeal has by this critically unfortunate decision re-written a new but absolutely confusing constitutional order which has the tendency of causing political and constitutional instability in the country.
"I pray and hope that the Supreme Court will set aside this judgment, which in my view is contrary to the letters and spirit of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999."
That is vintage Gani for you. Please pause and ponder on what Gani posited above, the decision of the Appeal court is a bad precedence. I had not thought about the angle Gani raised. The judgement is preposterous, and it cannot pass through the Supreme court. Either the Appeal court judges are bribed or they are taking the issue of liberation of democracy too far, the judgment is too bazaar.

I'm reading: After the Judgment

The Hero of February 13th

General Murtala Ramat Mohammed was born on November 8, 1938 to Risqua Muhammed and Uwani Rahamat in the ancient and historic city of Kano. He had his early education in Kano and finished up at Government (now Barewa) College, Zaria in 1957. In his early years General Murtala Muhammed was known as Murtala Rufai Mohammed. He changed this to Murtala Ramat Muhammed when he came to office as Head of State.General Mohammed enlisted into the Nigerian Army and was sent to Britain for training at Sandhurst Royal Academy as an Officer Cadet. His other advanced training courses and successes paved way for his rapid promotions in the rank and file of the Nigerian Army.
Commissioned 2nd Lieutenant in 1961,he rose to the rank of Brigadier in 1971. After a year's course at Joint Services Staff College in England, he took his first political appointment as Commissioner for Communications in 1974 which he combined with his military duties.
In the short span of 201 days in office before he was assassinated, General Mohammed's dynamic administration gave this country a new sense of direction, duty and patriotism.
General Murtala Ramat Muhammed's colorful life thus came to a tragic end at the tender age of 38 years. Many monuments in the country are dedicated to his memory, including the International Airport in Lagos and a park in Benin City
He would also be remembered for the creation of 19 states out of the 12 carved out in 1967 and the setting up of a Public Complaints Commission which gave probity to our personal and public lives.

I'm reading: The Hero of February 13th

Before the Court gives Judgement

The imbroglio between the Nigerian President and his Vice is no more news, what is the news and still being news is the cross carpeting of the Vice from PDP that brought him into power as Vice President to AC, an opposition party. The news is that, the VP was expected to resign his position as VP since he had decamped, but the VP stated that, he would not resigned. The President had taken steps to show that his VP had ceased to be in office as a result of his cross-carpeting, but slow down his measures apparently because he felt the Court should wade into the matter. The case is now in the court and judgement is expected anytime from now since the determination of the matter is going to be a landmark of court decision in our political history.
What however troubled me so much is the new insinuation some people are spreading that you cant bring morality into law and that morally, it is wrong for the VP to decamped and still hold the office, but constitutionally, he is allow to decamped and still hold the office. My annoyance is that, since when did morality not part of the law? or are we interpreting this particular morality to suit our political selfishness? As far as I am concern, anything that is morally wrong is cater for in the constitution, if the act of the VP is morally wrong, then the constitution needs to be amended to allow it.
While the world anxiously awaits the decision of the court on this very important and landmark judgment, I want to state clearly that it is a dangerous precedent on our political existence to allow the VP to continue in the office while he had already decamped from the party that brought him to power. Part of the outcome is what we had seen with the activities of the VP in recent times especially after his decamping, by condemning the government he was also part of for good 7 years. Ironically, he is asking for the electorates to vote for him as the new President and at the same time condemning all his efforts as the VP for 7 years. To me, I think he is unknowingly campaigning against himself by condemning the government he participated in for 7 years by telling us that he has nothing to offer us, because if all his 7 years effort as VP is what he is now condemning, then his sojourning as President is going to be nothing to write home about.
Ever ponder along this lines?

I'm reading: Before the Court gives Judgement