The Supreme Court will now hear the Federal Government’s suit seeking to annul the National Assembly’s amendments to the Nigerian Constitution on May 25.
The apex court had earlier adjourned the suit to June 18 and had directed the Federal Government’s counsel, Mr Bayo Ojo (SAN), to address it on that day.
The decision to reschedule the adjournment followed application by Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), National Assembly Counsel, that the suit be heard before the expiration of the term of the current assembly.
Awomolo, in the application, urged the court to discharge its order of interlocutory injunction made on May 7, which restrained National Assembly from overriding the president’s veto of the amendments.
He further argued that the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) was not competent to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under the Supreme Court (Additional Jurisdiction) Act.
Awomolo also urged the court to dismiss the originating summons filed by the Attorney General of the Federation.
He said, “the originating summons dated 22nd April, 2015 is incompetent, fundamentally and incurably defective and thereby robs the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction.
“There is no known or reasonable cause of action disclosed in the originating summons to grant jurisdiction to the Supreme Court.
“The originating summons filed by the plaintiff is an improper, and or reckless invocation of the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.’’
Awomolo argued that the National Assembly was inaugurated on June 6, 2011 for a four-year term, which terminates on June 6, 2015, and the case would have become abated.
He said that it was, therefore, in the interest of justice and the good people of Nigeria that the suit be expeditiously heard and determined during the 7th Assembly’s lifespan.
The Supreme Court had on May 7 restrained the National Assembly from going ahead to enact into law the Fourth Alteration Act which seeks to amend the 1999 Constitution.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria, who presided at the mentioning of the suit, had ordered parties not to do anything that would affect the subject matter of the suit.
The court consequently adjourned the suit to June 18.
Ojo had in the originating summons claimed that the purported Fourth Alteration Act 2015 was not passed with the mandatory requirement of four-fifths majority of members of the National Assembly.
He urged the court to make an order nullifying and setting aside Sections 3, 4, 12, 14, 21, 23, 36, 39, 40, 43 and 44 of the amendments passed by the National Assembly.
Jonathan had declined to assent to the amendments after the National Assembly forwarded the amendments to him.
Jonathan had instead written back to National Assembly, giving his reasons for not appending his signature to the amendments.
The National Assembly, in turn, threatened to override the president’s veto after 30 days as constitutionally provided.
The president, therefore, in a swift move, instituted the suit against National Assembly at the Supreme Court seeking to annul the amendments.
