By Jonathan Ugbal
A High Court of Cross River State, presided over by Justice Elias Abua on Thursday held that the Claimant in Suit Number HC/143/2024, Raymond Manga Esq, seeking to stop Rt. Hon. Elvert Ayambem, from parading himself as the Speaker of the 10th House of Assembly, lacked the locus to institute the matter.
The Court, however, held that the substantive matter had some merit and agreed with the Claimant that Mr. Ayambem was “in fact,” removed from office as Speaker.
READ MORE: BREAKING: Ayambem Was Validly Removed As Speaker, Court Holds
The Matter
Manga, had in his suit commenced by Originating Summons, argued that Mr. Ayambem, who is the third defendant, had been impeached by 17 members of the House of Assembly on May 22nd 2024 in line with Section 92(2)C of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN) as altered.
He argued that even though a meeting brokered by the Governor, Senator Bassey Otu, listed as the 28th defendant, led to a reaffirmation on the 27th of May, Mr. Ayambem was not validly re-elected as Speaker as per Section 92(1) of the 1999 CFRN as altered. He contended that the process for selecting a Speaker is clear and cannot be done by Executive fiat.
According to him, the 28th defendant basically browbeat the fourth to 27th defendant into accepting the fourth defendant as Speaker, an exercise which he argued was unconstitutional. He queried why the fourth defendant even presided over the session that purportedly “reaffirmed” him.
Accordingly, Manga Esq argued that the fourth defendant, Sylvanus Agabi who was elected as Deputy Speaker during the first sitting of the House in June 2023, should be presiding over the affairs of the House as per Section 95 of the 1999 CFRN as altered.
The Assembly was listed as the first defendant; the Clerk of the House was listed as the second defendant. The 17 members who impeached Mr. Ayambem were listed as fifth to 21st defendant, while their colleagues were listed as 22nd to 27th.
He prayed the Court to declare that Mr. Ayambem was validly impeached and that his reaffirmation was a nullity, hence should stop parading himself as the Speaker of the 10th Assembly.
The Defense
In a counter affidavit deposed to by Affiong Bassey, a staff of the State ministry of Justice, the defendants argued that the 3rd defendant was never removed as Speaker. They argued that the Governor was at liberty to meet with anyone, including the fourth to 27th defendant, especially as there was no vacancy in the leadership of the House, which was evident in the fact that the second defendant had not called for a new election.
They filed a preliminary objection challenging the locus of the Claimant to institute the suit as well as jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the suit.
They also kicked against the application for interlocutory injunctions to restrain the third defendant from parading himself as Speaker, arguing that the injunction was in tandem with the reliefs sought in the Originating Summons.
The defendants argued that the votes and proceedings of that day shows that only correspondences were taken and motions as well as one of urgent public importance of which broke up the House leading it to end abruptly, meaning no impeachment proceedings happened.
The Judgment
The Court, in its judgment lasting nearly three hours, while ruling on the first issue in the preliminary objection which bothers on whether the Claimant has the locus, relied on a plethora of authorities and agreed with the defendants that the Claimant should have satisfied all requirements and show that he is affected or his civil rights were abridged by the actions of the defendants.
The Court held that relying on Section 6(6) of the 1999 CFRN was not enough as the Claimant has failed to show sufficiently that he would have suffered injury or damage, thereby granting him locus. It said the mere fact that an Executive or Legislative directive has elements that are unconditional does not confer him the right to sue.
Specifically, the Court held that, the failure of the Claimant to file the certificate of incorporation of his law firm to confer on him, “a class above other legal practitioners” and show the objects to prove sufferance of injury, was at the core of the decision of the Court.
On issue two, bordering on jurisdiction, Justice Abua said he was disinclined to go into that and went into the substance of other issues for determination.
The Court said that despite the level of immunity conferred on the Legislature by the Legislative House Law, CAP L11 laws of Cross River State, 2004, the defendants failed to challenge head on, and controvert the evidence produced by the Claimant which showed that the fifth to 21st defendants did impeach the third defendant.
The Court held that even though the defendants argued that the votes and proceedings of that day shows that only correspondences were taken and motions as well as one of urgent public importance of which broke up the House, The Claimant’s position that the impeachment was the motion that broke up the House remained un-controverted and unchallenged and hence is deemed authentic.
The Court, relying on the affidavit of the defendants, deposed to by Affiong Bassey a staff of the Ministry of Justice which said the facts stated therein were gotten from the Clerk, who is the second defendant; the Director, Legal Services of the Assembly, Lawrence Achuta Esq and a Director in the Ministry of Justice said they were, at best, “hearsay” as none of the persons listed are members of the Assembly and did not participate in the proceedings of the day by the House of Assembly.
The Court held that, therefore, the document which carries the signatures of the fifth to 21st defendant will be held to be true, and ruled that the “the defendants have not denied its validity, the third defendant was in fact removed.”
The Court also berated at both Counsels – Raymond Manga Esq and Anthony Effiom Esq for not providing the Court with copies of the numerous authorities cited.
Reactions
In his response, counsel to the defendants, Anthony Effiom Esq who is the Director, Civil Litigation in the State’s Ministry of Justice commended the Court for his industry and said that they will apply for the judgment and study it to guide their next step which he promised to inform the Court.
On his part, the Claimant told CrossRiverWatch that; “I feel very glad, except that the issue of locus standi is not satisfactorily handled. I am not satisfied with that. That I don’t have locus standi based on what the Court relied on. I sued as a person and not as a law firm. The consideration of the Court was more of a law firm suing. I did not sue as a law firm, so I did not need to attach my incorporation certificate.”
“You can see that the judgment has agreed that the Speaker was removed. The only thing is that the Court also said that we don’t have the locus standi to challenge the removal, but it has agreed with us that he was removed. So, as it is now, that man is not the Speaker. However, we are going to challenge it in appeal.”
Earlier in Court, Mr. Manga told the Court that he had satisfied his conscience which his colleague, Effiom Esq, admitted, adding that it will help develop law and practice.
In a similar vein, Mba Ukweni Esq, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria who was in Court, commended the Court for its industry.
Ukweni SAN, also explained to CrossRiverWatch that the practice of Courts of first instance, going into the substance of cases after upholding preliminary objections on locus and jurisdiction, was usually to ensure the matter is not referred for retrial.
Meanwhile, CrossRiverWatch gathered that the defendants may cross-appeal if the Claimant decides to take the matter to the appellate Court.
The Timeline
22nd May 2024 – 17 members of the Cross River State House of Assembly pass a vote of no confidence on Mr. Ayambem accusing him of financial impropriety among others, thereby impeaching him.
READ MORE: BREAKING: Cross River State House Of Assembly Speaker, Elvert Ayambem Impeached
22nd May 2024 – Mr. Ayambem’s spokesman, Mr. Matthew Okache says there was no impeachment proceedings as a notice of impeachment was never served and that Mr. Ayambem remains speaker.
READ MORE: Elvert Ayambem Remains Speaker – Cross River Assembly Says After Drama, Notice Of Impeachment
23rd May 2024 – The Commissioner of Police in Cross River State, CP Gyongon Grimah deploys heavily armed policemen to the Assembly complex amidst speculation of the election of a new Speaker.
25th May 2024 – Governor Bassey Otu convenes a meeting with all 25 members of the Assembly. The details remain sketchy.
27th May 2024 – Mr. Ayambem stands on the podium during the Children’s Day celebrations at the U. J. Essence Stadium in Calabar and receives the salute while the Masters of Ceremonies announce him as the Speaker of the Assembly and a representative of Governor Bassey Otu.
27th May 2024 – Mr. Okache issued a statement saying the House has reaffirmed Mr. Ayambem as Speaker.
11th June 2024 – Mr. Ayambem presides over plenary where members seek the removal of the Chairman of the Cross River State Traditional Rulers Council, the first after the impeachment saga. He presides over several other plenaries.
3rd July 2024 – Mr. Ayambem dissolves standing committees excluding the Committee on Lands which according to him has a “pending assignment.” He commends his colleagues for standing by him.
READ MORE: Impeachment Saga: Ayambem Dissolves Committees, Hail Colleagues
25th July 2024 – Justice Elias Abua of the High Court of Cross River State holds that he was validly removed but says the Claimant lacks locus in the matter. The judgment was being read when Mr. Ayambem was presiding over the Assembly which approved the request of the Governor which basically seeks to replace the members of the Cross River State Independent Electoral Commission.
READ MORE: CROSIEC Chairman, Mike Ushie Resigns After State Government’s Swipe
Leave feedback about this