Supreme Court has on Thursday, May 19 granted Rivers State’s request to be added as a party to the litigation filed by President Muhammadu Buhari, and the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, to have section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022, declared invalid.
Justice Musa Dattijo, who presided over a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court Justices, approved the joinder application filed by Rivers through the Speaker of the House of Assembly and the Attorney-General and delayed the case until May 26.
The applicants told the Supreme Court that they were opposed to the SC/CV/504/2022 lawsuit, which had the National Assembly as the sole respondent at the time.
Buhari and Malami filed a suit at the Supreme Court, seeking an interpretation of Section 84(12) of the Electoral Amendment Act 2022.
They are asking the Supreme Court to strike down a portion of the Electoral Act that they claim is in violation of the country’s Constitution.
The plaintiffs argue that Section 84 (12) of the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 2022, is in conflict with Sections 42, 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 147, 151, 177, 182, 192, and 196 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), as well as Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.
They further claimed that the President and Vice President, Governor and Deputy Governor, Senate and House of Representatives, House of Assembly, Ministers, Commissioners, and Special Advisers are all qualified under the Constitution.
Read Also: Supreme Court Declares Buhari’s Executive Order 10 Unconstitutional, Dismisses Governors’ N66bn Suit
They asked the court to declare that the joint and combined reading of sections 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 147, 151, 177, 182, 192, and 196 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended); and the provision of Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act, 2022, which also ignores Section 84(3) of the same Act, are additional qualifying and/or disqualifying factors for the National Assembly, House
In a similar vein, the National Assembly has petitioned the Supreme Court to dismiss the case.
In a counter-affidavit submitted by its lawyer, Kayode Ajulo, the National Assembly stated that the Supreme Court cannot be used to change any provision of any law passed by legislators in the exercise of their legislative duties as allowed by the Constitution.
They claimed that the 1999 Constitution, as modified, granted the National Assembly the authority to enact measures that would improve governance.
