APC dragged to court over its marginalisation of southeast in National Assembly zoning formula

NIGERIA'S ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has been dragged to court by the Kingdom Human Rights Foundation International (KHRFI) over its National Assembly zoning formula which is claimed to be unfair as it marginalises the southeast geo-political zone.

Following the recent National Assembly elections, one of the first things the new senate and House of Representatives will do when it sits is to elect their leaders. However, the APC has already zoned the senate president to the northeast, with party leaders backing Yobe North's Senator Ahmad Lawan and the speakership of the House of Representatives has been zoned to the southwest with the Surulere 1 lawmaker Hon Femi Gbajabiamila the party's candidate.

However, there are several other candidates vying for the position of speakership from other geo-political zones like the southeast and north central zones. In these zones, there is widespread opposition to Hon Gbajabiamila's candidacy because he is also from the southwest like vice president Professor Yemi Osinbajo.

Yesterday, KHRFI filed a suit in the federal high court, Abuja, seeking an order nullifying the APC's zoning arrangement for the ninth National Assembly. KHRFI spokesman and aggrieved APC member Kenneth Uzochukwu, described the party’s zoning arrangement which excluded the southeast as unconstitutional, unjust, discriminatory and clannish.

He added that the party had also zoned the position of the deputy senate president to the south-south and that of the deputy speaker of the House of Representatives to the north central geo-political zones. According to KHRFI, with President Muhammadu Buhari from the north west, Professor Osinbajo from the south west and the acting chief justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad from the northeast, the southeast had been totally excluded from the political arithmetic of Nigeria.

HRFI lawyer Kingdom Nnamdi, said that this breaches the express provisions, spirit and tenor of sections 14 (3) and (4) and 244 of the 1999 constitution and offends the federal character principle of Nigeria. The APC, the National Assembly and the Federal Character Commission were joined in the suit as the first, second and third defendants, respectively.

Zaro Melchizedek, a litigation clerk with KHRFI, added: "The APC-led federal government believes in injustice, practises nepotism and has by its decision further divided  Nigerians along ethnic and geopolitical lines, contrary to the express provisions of the constitution. The equitable spread of elective political/appointive offices in Nigeria is constitutional by virtue of sections 14 (3) and (4) and section 224 of the 1999 constitution and should be strictly followed in the appointment, election, selection, nomination or endorsement of all persons to occupy all  political offices in Nigeria.”

In addition, the plaintiffs also urged the court to make an order compelling/mandating the Federal Character Commission of Nigeria to carry out its constitutional/statutory responsibility of working out equitable formula for the distribution of all cadres of posts in the public service of the federation. They added that this should be particularly taken note of when it comes to the present composition of the government of the federation.