Akume had asked the court to declare the removal of the elected local government officials as a coup d'etat.
The Makurdi High Court has adjourned the suit filed by a public opinion analyst and activist from Benue State, Sesugh Akume against Governor Hyacinth Alia, for sacking all elected local government officials in the state.
Akume had asked the court to declare the removal of the elected local government officials as a coup d'etat.
In the suit filed on Monday, October 23, 2023 through his lawyers, the activist contended that Governor Alia's action of sacking indefinitely and suspending the elected local government officials in the state for four months without justification since June 23, 2023 has left the local government system—which is the most critical tier of government, being closest to the people—rudderless with no executive or legislative councils and no governance going on at all.
Also joined in the suit marked number MHC/347/2023, are the State Attorney-General; Speaker of House of Assembly; the House of Assembly; and the Special Adviser, Bureau of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs as the 2nd to 5th Respondents.
In his originating summon, the Applicant stated that the 1999 Constitution which is the Supreme law of the land under which every other law bows recognises only democratically-elected local government councils. "Further to this, the Supreme Court, which the highest court in the land in a plethora of cases has condemned the suspension/removal of elected local government officials and the appointment of unelected officials.
"It has vehemently stressed that elected local government officials are NOT employees of the state government and, therefore, CANNOT be suspended, sacked or councils dissolved by a governor and/or House of Assembly, not even on allegations of corrupt practices. It has gone further to nullify provisions of local government laws in Nigeria that authorise governors and Houses of Assembly to suspend/remove elected local government officials and/or appoint unelected officials," Akume had said.
"Drawing from the above, in this suit I ask the court to determine whether or not the governor and House of Assembly have the power to suspend elected local government executive and legislative councils; whether or not the appointment of local government transitional/caretaker committees, interim/sole administrators (or whatever name called) is lawful; and whether or not sections 62, 147 and others in the Local Government Law that provide for the suspension of elected officials and appointment of officials are valid and constitutional?
"Furthermore, whether or not the action of suspending the 23 local government councils despite an order of court stopping it is in order; and finally whether or not the removal of elected officials is not a coup d’etat? A coup d’etat is defined by the dictionary as ‘an illegal and overt attempt by military or government elites to unseat the incumbent leaders. A coup d’etat, therefore, is not only carried out by the military but by civilians as well.
"I ask the court to declare the obvious that the governor and House of Assembly have no power whatsoever to suspend elected local government officials, not even on allegations is corrupt practices, and that it is an abuse to do so; and that any local government administration, insofar as it is not democratically elected is an illegality.
"The court is further asked to declare the sections that allow for suspension/removal of elected local government officials and the appointment of local government administrations null and void and to in fact, order them expunged from the Local Government Law outright. Also to declare the suspension after an order of the court stopping it as contempt for the court; and to state emphatically that any removal or suspension of elected local government officials as a coup."
He added, "Beyond declarations, the court is prayed to order the respondents to not appoint any transitional/caretaker administrations and where this is done during the pendency of the suit, an order sacking them. Another is an order setting aside all communications and decisions of the respondents pertaining to this suspension of local government councils.
"And finally, an order for the respondents to reinstate all the suspended officials immediately and to fully restore their authority, rights, privileges, and entitlements and to immediately pay all their salaries and allowances for the months they have been away, and to offer them unreserved apologies.
"Due to the importance and urgency of this matter, a further application marked motion number MHC/1982M/23 praying the court to set aside its usual protocol and procedures, but to hear and conclude this matter expeditiously, was also filed along with the main suit. A date is yet to be fixed for the matter to commence in court."
The Applicant, however, prayed the court to designate the suspension/removal/dissolution of elected councils as a coup, and rightly so; and the prayer to the court to NOT grant a stay of execution of the judgment pending an appeal if/when we get victory at the trial court.
He maintained that some governors in Nigeria, full of impunity are deliberately violating the law because there are usually no consequences for their misbehaviour.
The court adjourned the case on Thursday to 11th of December for final hearing/adoption of the substantive matter.
“Our matter was assigned to the present court, and today's date set by the court exactly a week ago, on 2 November. On that very same day all respondents were served all the processes,” Akume said in another statement sent to SaharaReporters on Thursday night.
“As anticipated, the reply by the respondents to our application was only served on us today in court. Seeing no wisdom in asking the court for time to file a response to their counter for the court to rule on the motion on another date, learned counsel Atume Butu, Esq., voluntarily withdrew the application, to save time.
“The court has given 11 December for (final) hearing/adoption of the substantive matter, when it expects all processes to be filed and exchanged awaiting adoption on that date and next will be the judgement.
“The claim by the Benue attorney-general (himself who represented the respondents along with a large retinue of lawyers) that they had not been served the originating processes in the substantive matter was discountenanced by the trial judge who confirmed from court records before him that they were indeed served the processes with evidence of acknowledgement.
“With this and other excuses and delay tactics out of the way, we look forward to receiving whatever defence they might have and to reply and exchange all processes before 11 December for adoption and to await the judgement.”