Law

Legal Experts and Former Lawmakers Express Concerns Over Deputy Governor’s Impeachment Proceedings

Debate Arises Over Procedural Integrity and Political Implications

Published

2 months ago

September 28, 2023

Stella Charles Akupue

Legal Experts and Former Lawmakers Express Concerns Over Deputy Governor's Impeachment Proceedings

In a move that has ignited legal and political discussions, Femi Emodamori, legal counsel to the House of Assembly, as well as prominent lawyers including Jiti Ogunye, alongside former lawmakers from Ondo State, have raised objections to the ongoing process to impeach the Deputy Governor of the state, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, who stands accused of alleged gross misconduct.

Emodamori, representing the House of Assembly, contends that Aiyedatiwa’s attempt to halt his impeachment through an interim court order is premature and procedurally flawed. He asserts that approaching the court before the completion of the impeachment process is not in alignment with established legal protocols.

Emodamori argues that if the lawmakers meticulously follow the guidelines outlined in Section 188 of the Constitution, court intervention is unwarranted until the constitutionally mandated panel is constituted to review the allegations. Also Read: https://legalattorneyblog.com/2023/09/19/ogun-state-to-present-five-witnesses-against-impeached-ijebu-east-local-government-chairman/

He elaborates, “Rushing to court even before the panel is constituted is an abuse of judicial process. He doesn’t have a fundamental human right to protect at that stage. The body to hear him is the panel to be constituted by the Chief Judge. Until the body begins work, how do you complain about the violation of a fair hearing?”

Jiti Ogunye shares similar reservations about Aiyedatiwa’s legal strategy, asserting that the process provided by Section 188 of the Constitution is clear and comprehensive. He emphasizes the importance of adhering to the prescribed steps, including proper notification to the Deputy Governor, establishing a panel, and a thorough review process before any decision is reached.

Additionally, Ogunye raises concerns about the federalist principle, highlighting that Aiyedatiwa is a state deputy governor suing various entities within the same state in federal courts. He views this as a violation of federalism principles and suggests that the appropriate jurisdiction for such matters should be within the state.

Former lawmakers from Ondo State, represented by Abiodun Jerome, have also entered the discourse, cautioning the Assembly members against rushing into the impeachment of Aiyedatiwa. They urge the Ondo Assembly to prioritize critical issues affecting the state and avoid becoming instruments of political manoeuvring.

Jerome emphasizes the need for the House to be cautious and not incite public unrest through hasty actions. He calls on the Assembly to resist external influences and maintain the integrity of their constitutional roles.

Jerome underscores the importance of preserving the state’s political stability and not setting a precedent of political manipulation within the Assembly.

This ongoing debate reflects the complexities surrounding the impeachment proceedings and the need to thoroughly examine legal and procedural aspects and their broader political implications.