Paragraph 1: The Removal and Denial
Mudashiru Obasa, the former speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, has publicly contested his removal from office, asserting that the lawmakers failed to adhere to the proper constitutional procedures for his impeachment. Obasa, who was ousted on January 13th amidst allegations of misconduct and financial impropriety, vehemently denies these accusations. His removal led to the appointment of former deputy speaker, Mojisola Meranda, as his successor. Obasa, who was in the United States at the time of his removal, addressed a gathering of supporters upon his return, emphasizing the need for due process in his impeachment.
Paragraph 2: Obasa’s Rebuttals and Assertions
During his address, Obasa directly challenged the specific allegations of corruption, ridiculing the notion that he had sanctioned exorbitant expenditures, such as a N16 billion gate and N1 billion each for 40 Hilux vehicles. He highlighted his extensive experience as a lawmaker, spanning over two decades, emphasizing his position as the longest-serving member of the House. While acknowledging the possibility of removal, he stressed the importance of adhering to constitutional guidelines. He accused the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Isola Olawale, of orchestrating a police invasion of the Assembly on the day of his removal and further claimed that his residences were besieged by over 200 police officers, effectively placing his family under house arrest.
Paragraph 3: Procedural Arguments and Institutional Integrity
Obasa drew a parallel with the removal of a previous speaker, Jokotola Pelumi, noting that Pelumi was present in the House during the process and there was no police involvement. He challenged his accusers to provide concrete evidence of his alleged corruption, underscoring his commitment to upholding the image and integrity of the Lagos State House of Assembly. He also asserted that he harbored no animosity towards members of the Governance Advisory Council (GAC) or Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu. In a subsequent interaction with journalists, Obasa maintained that he remained the rightful speaker until the correct procedures were followed for his removal, hinting at potential legal action.
Paragraph 4: Reactions and Responses
Reactions to Obasa’s claims were varied. Anthony Adefuye, a GAC member, expressed support for Obasa, concurring with his assertion that the removal process was flawed. However, GAC Chairman Tajudeen Olusi declined to comment directly, stating that his focus was on ensuring the smooth functioning of the party. The APC’s Publicity Secretary, Seye Oladejo, emphasized the party’s non-interference in the Assembly’s internal affairs. Meanwhile, the Assembly released a statement countering Obasa’s claims, arguing that his actions could incite tension and reiterating that the majority of members supported his removal and Meranda’s election. The police commissioner declined to respond directly to Obasa’s allegations of abuse of power.
Paragraph 5: Analysts Weigh In
Political analysts offered their perspectives on the unfolding situation. Professor Emmanuel Ojo cautioned that Obasa’s confrontational approach could lead to his political demise, advising him to pursue legal avenues rather than engaging in public attacks. He suggested that Obasa might have fallen out of favor with influential political figures. Professor Hassan Saliu highlighted the political maneuvering often involved in speaker removals in Nigeria, calling for a review of the seemingly lax procedures. He pointed out that Obasa’s confidence likely stemmed from the backing of powerful elements within Lagos politics. Malachy Ugwummadu, a legal expert, noted that while the presumption of regularity exists in such removals, it doesn’t preclude legal challenges.
Paragraph 6: The Impasse and the Future
The situation remains unresolved, with Obasa insisting on his position as speaker and hinting at legal action, while the Assembly maintains its stance on his removal. The involvement of the police and the allegations of political machinations add further complexity to the issue. The implications of this power struggle within the Lagos State House of Assembly and the potential legal battles that may ensue remain to be seen, as the future of both Obasa and the Assembly’s leadership hangs in the balance. The incident raises broader questions about due process, political influence, and the stability of legislative bodies in Nigeria.
