36 LAGOS LAWMAKERS PASS VOTE OF CONFIDENCE ON MOJISOLA MERANDA, HOUSE ADJOURNS INDEFINITELY (VIDEOS)
Read Time:4 Minute, 6 Second
36 lawmakers of the Lagos State House of Assembly have passed a vote of confidence on Speaker of the House, Mojisola Meranda, reaffirming her leadership amidst ongoing tension within the Assembly.
The motion was passed during a session earlier today, signaling strong support for Meranda as she continues to navigate a period of political instability following the removal of her predecessor, Mudashiru Obasa.
In a related development, the House also announced an indefinite adjournment.
In the early hours of Monday, operatives from the Department of State Security (DSS) and the Nigeria Police Force raided the Lagos State House of Assembly, sealing the offices of Speaker Mojisola Meranda, her deputy, and the clerk of the house.
By 10 am, armed security personnel had taken control of the premises at Alausa, Ikeja, and were frisking passersby.
Meranda arrived with her convoy around 11:15 am.
It is important to note that the former Speaker, Mudashiru Obasa, who has been embroiled in controversy, has filed a lawsuit against the state lawmakers challenging his removal as Speaker.
Obasa has filed a motion at the Ikeja Division of the State High Court, requesting an expedited hearing of his case.
Obasa was ousted by 32 out of the 40 members of the Assembly on January 13, 2025, while he was in the United States. His removal was described as a “coup” by President Bola Tinubu.
The situation has sparked division within the Governance Advisory Council (GAC), the top decision-making body of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Lagos, with differing opinions on Obasa’s removal.
In his lawsuit, Obasa is challenging the legality of his removal. The motion, filed on Wednesday, February 12, 2025, lists the Lagos State House of Assembly and Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, the current Speaker, as defendants.
In the suit filed by his lawyers, led by Chief Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, Obasa is seeking several reliefs, among which are: “An order fixing a date for the expeditious hearing of the originating summons.
“An order of this Honourable Court abridging the time within which the Defendants may file their response by way of counter affidavits/written addresses as specified by the Rules of this Honourable Court, to 7 days after the hearing and determination of this Application.
“An order of this Honourable Court abridging the time within which the Plaintiff/Applicant may file its Reply of points law, as specified in the Rules of this Honourable Court, to 3 days of the service of the Defendants processes on him.”
Obasa’s application is based on nine points, including the interpretation of several sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), as well as the Rules and Standing Orders of the Lagos State House of Assembly.
The suit read in part: “This application is predicated among which he stated the suit concerns the interpretation of Sections 36; 90; 92(2)(c); 101 and 311 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As amended) vis-à-vis ORDER V RULE 18(2) and Order II Rule 9(1)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii)(viii) OF RULES AND STANDING ORDER OF LAGOS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (which enjoy constitutional flavor and status);
“The action borders on the constitutionality or otherwise of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly of the 13th January, 2025 where the Plaintiff herein, as Honourable Speaker was said to be impeached.
“This action challenges the constitutionality of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly to sit during recess without the Speaker reconvening the House or giving any other person powers to reconvene the House.
“Public interest requires the case to be heard and determined speedily and expeditiously so that legislative activities in the State is not stalled.
“The legality of the continued sitting of the 1st defendant under the present leadership in violation of the aforementioned laws and rules calls for an urgent determination;
“The nature of this action is such that is required to be heard and determined expeditiously having regard to the exceptional circumstances surrounding same;
“There is need to abridge the time within which the Defendants may file their response to the originating summon as well as time within which the claimant/Applicant may file its reply on point of law; and
“This Honourable Court is imbued with inherent powers to grant accelerated hearing and abridgment of time; and
“It is expedient to grant accelerated hearing of this action and abridgment of time for parties to file the relevant processes in the interest of justice.”
TRAGEDY HITS KATSINA AS MILITARY STRIKE KILLS SIX FAMILY MEMBERS
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
100 %
1
0