+2348145391376  support@e-projectmatters.com


 Format: MS-WORD   Chapters: 1-5

 Pages: 100+   Attributes: STANDARD RESEARCH

 Amount: 3,000

 Sep 02, 2019 |  10:27 pm |  1725



This project report centres on Appraisal of impeachment process under the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria. It x-rays basically the Legislatures excessive and negative use of impeachment process provided in the 1999 Constitution against the Executive arm of government, particularly, State Governors and their Deputies. This anomaly forms the foundation upon which the statement of the research problem of this work is anchored.

This research highlights in details the procedure for impeachment, the historical development of impeachment, the meaning of gross misconduct which is the main ground for carrying out impeachment proceedings. The roles of courts and other institutions are also discussed.

The research reveals through case laws how our legislators abused the impeachment process in order to achieve their selfish interests while relying on the erroneous impression that their actions cannot be questioned in court. The courts however rose to the occasion and checkmated their excesses leading to upturning almost all the cases filed by the impeached persons. The courts defined the true import and intent of Sections 143(10) and 188(10) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria which oust the jurisdiction of court from entertaining cases emanating from impeachment proceedings.



1.1      Background of the Study

The gale of impeachments and threats of impeachment of political office holders in Nigeria today are not only worrisome and alarming, but pose a great danger to the survival of our nascent democracy which we all longed and laboured for after many years of military hegemony.

The 4th Republic (the focus of this research) which started from 29th May 1999 to present day has recorded so many impeachments of political office holders ranging from speakers of Houses of Assembly and their Deputies Governors and their Deputies as well as Senate Presidents. At a point, members of the National Assembly threatened to impeach former President Olusegun Obasanjo as well as Goodluck Jonathan.

The impeachment of Murtala Nyako of Adamawa State and the botched attempt to impeach the Governor of Nasarawa State, Al-Makura, are factors that motivated, inspired and provoked the researcher to embark on this research. There is no doubt that this research will help to enrich the existing jurisprudence on the law and practice of impeachment process under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

1.2             Statement of research problem

The gale of impeachments in Nigeria has done more harm than good Politicians have thrown caution to the wind in their efforts to fulfil their political goals and ambitions without following due process laid down in the Constitution. It is on record that many impeachments took place outside the hallowed chambers of parliament like in the hotel or even the residence of one of the conspirators[1].

Most times, the quorum will not be formed and yet the honourable members will go ahead with the impeachment proceedings. We have seen instances where a willing member will be appointed as Speaker pro tempore to carry out the duties of a substantive Speaker who is not willing to join the conspiration to impeach a Governor[2].

All these amount to breaches of the Constitution which the politicians swore to protect. Where the Constitution is breached with impunity, the consequences are jungle justice, anarchy and chaos which are evil winds that blow nobody any good. Those anomalies are some of the reasons behind Military intervention in our politics. We are witnesses to the wanton destruction of lives and properties in Nasarawa State when the people rose up against the legislators who were bent on impeaching Governor Al- Makura of Nasarawa State by hook or crook.

There is no doubt that this research is worth embarking upon. It will be of immense help to students of Political Science, Political Scientists, Politicians, Law Students, Lawyers, Judges, Legislators, Legal Academics, Teachers of Political Science and the general public. This research will surely help to enrich our jurisprudence especially in the area of impeachment proceedings. Nigerians, particularly politicians will benefit from this research which aims to x-ray the procedure for impeachment proceedings as well as the dos and don’ts of impeachment process, thereby stabilizing the political system.

1.4        Objectives

The main objective of this research is to examine the behaviours of Politicians, especially the legislators who are in the habit of breaching theConstitution unashamedly for their selfish political interests and personal aggrandizement, and proffer solutions. [3]

The main objective of this project is therefore to sensitize Nigerians on the anomalies being perpetrated by our politicians, particularly our Legislatures, in the area of impeachment of political office holders, and to acquaint them of their right to curtail these anomalies in appropriate situations through peaceful protests and constitutional power of recall against the legislators. Although the Supreme Court in the case of Inakoju v. Adeleke and Others[4] has cleared the hurdle on the issue of jurisdiction of courts to entertain issues relating to impeachment of political office holders holding that courts have jurisdiction to inquire whether the procedure for impeachment was religiously followed, there still remains the issue of the meaning of gross misconduct which is still being abused with impunity as our case laws have shown[5].

As the title implies this research covers impeachment proceedings in Nigeria between 29th May 1999 to the present day, particularly as they relate to the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) in other words, this project focuses basically on impeachment proceedings in Nigeria between 29th May 1999 to the present day.

1.6         Methodology

In this research I used and relied on the following research methods. Empirical Research: This involved the collection of facts and data through interviews and questionnaires from target groups. The facts and data were later analysed and experimented upon from which results were patiently obtained. To this effect interviews were conducted and questionnaires administered on respondents from whom facts and data were collected. Our respondents include Politicians, Lawyers, Journalist, Students and the electorate from target areas. This was followed with analysis of the data in our Law chambers as well as libraries in order to obtain the desired result. Doctrinal Research Methodology was also employed extensively in carrying out this research. This involved the use of text books, Journals, Judicial decisions particularly the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) is also relied upon extensively.

1.7   Literature Review

It is apparent that there is a dearth of literatures in this area of our jurisprudence. This opinion is hinged on the fact that there is hardly any book that is fully written on impeachment process apart from some articles that are fully devoted to the subject. Despite the shortcoming, the works of eight scholars are hereby reviewed.

Impeachment: This is a sub topic in the book what is constitutional Law[6]. Dalhatu introduced the topic and traced the origin of impeachment process to England from where the United States adopted same. He then discussed impeachment procedure under the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria. He discussed legislative reverse on impeachment proceedings and cited examples of United State and British Constitutions on one hand and the Nigerian Constitution on the other hand. The learned author concluded the discussion with Judicial Intervention in The Impeachment Proceedings. He cited the popular case of Abdulkadir Balarabe Musa v. Auta Hamza and section 170(10), my hands are tied by it as I hold that the exercise in question was purely a legislative constitutional affair quite outside the jurisdiction of this honourable court.”

The book, What Is Constitutional Law? (which contains the topic impeachment) was published in 2008. It however and surprisingly failed to examine the earlier Supreme Court decision in Inakoju and Others v. Adeleke and Others[7] [8] which gave the courts the jurisdiction to inquire whether the impeachment process was duly carried out as provided by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) it should be noted that Balarebe Musa case was decided pursuant to section 170(10) of the 1979 Constitution of Nigeria which is in pari materia with section 188(10) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended). There is therefore a lacuna that needs to be filled and which this research has taken care of.

Nigeria”[9], introduced the subject matter and analysed the constitutional provisions on impeachment. He highlighted the provisions of section 143 of the 1999 Constitution which empowers the National Assembly to remove the President or Vice President from office in accordance with laid down procedures. The author referred to section 188 of the Constitution[10] which provides for removal of the Governor or Deputy Governor of a State in accordance with the provisions of the section.

The learned author then discussed how legislators circumvented and flouted the provisions of the Constitution relating to procedure for impeachment while hiding under the ouster clause in section 188(10) of the same Constitution. That was the situation until the decision of the Supreme Court in Inakoju v. Adeleke[11] wherein the Supreme Court held that courts have jurisdiction to enquire whether the procedures for impeachment were duly followed.

Nigerian democratic project through their bold interpretation of the Constitution.

There is no doubt that the article is a masterpiece on the issue of impeachment, particularly as regards the jurisdiction of courts to determine impeachment cases.

There is a need to improve on the work of the learned author, particularly in view of the latest cases on impeachment proceedings. There was an impeachment process in Adamawa State which sacked former Governor Murtala Nyako, the botched attempt to impeach the Governor of Nasarawa State by the State House of Assembly and the impeachment of the Deputy Governor of Taraba State which was later reversed by the Supreme Court. These are some of the cases that are treated in the research and which the above article could not treat having been written before the occurrence of the impeachment proceedings.

Secondly, the article hinged on the jurisdiction of courts to entertain impeachment litigations accruing from impeachment matters and failed to take care of issues like origin of impeachment process and the controversial phrase ‘gross misconduct’ which the legislators often rely upon to achieve their aim of impeachment.

1 9

Mowoe, in his book “Constitutional Law in Nigeria” , treated the issue of impeachment as one of the constitutional powers and functions given the legislature to checkmate the executive arm of government whether at the Federal level or at the State level. The author observed that the power of impeachment has been wielded at the State level of government in Nigeria whereas at the Federal level, its use has been threatened only. The learned author goes on to discuss the procedure for impeachment of President and Vice President as provided under section 143 of the 1999 Constitution beginning with notice in writing of any allegation against the President and Vice President, with specified detailed particulars, supported by one-third of the members of the National Assembly and presented to the President of the Senate who must within seven days serve a copy of such on the person being indicted as well as on all the members of the National Assembly. The next is the examination of the meaning of gross misconduct as defined by the Constitution as regards impeachment proceedings. He opined that the [12]

The author further discusses the role of the two Houses of the National Assembly and the Chief Justice of the Federation. The latter must at the request of the President of the Senate set up a panel of seven members who in the opinion of the Chief Justice are of unquestionable integrity and who are not members of the public service any legislative house or political party, to investigate the allegation.

The learned author then x-rays the outing of the jurisdiction of courts to determine any question arising from the panel of seven or the National Assembly as regards the impeachment of the President or the Vice President. The learned author makes a comparison with impeachment proceedings in the United States where the House of Representatives has the power of impeachment whilst the Senate has the sole power to try impeachment.

The learned author concluded by saying the obvious that in the history of Nigeria, it is only at the State level that chief executives have ever been successfully impeached starting with the locus classicus case of Alhaji

1 T

Balarabe Musa v. Kaduna State House of Assembly .

In as much as the learned author did a good work in the analysis of the issues relating to impeachment process in Nigeria, there is still much room for improvement considering the period the book was written, it did not take into account some of the impeachment cases such as the impeachment of former Governor Murtala Nyako of Adamawa State as well as the failed impeachment proceeding against Governor Al Makura of Nasarawa State. It did not discuss the origin of impeachment process which this research will fully treat. Finally only few pages are devoted to the issue of impeachment process.

Umar in his book, Politics and Law Making In Nigeria[13] [14], devoted the entire chapter five of this book to some Legal Aspects of the Impeachment Questions. This book centres more on the impeachment of Balarabe Musa, the first impeachment casualty in the history of impeachment of political office holders in Nigeria. The learned author noted under introduction that the power conferred upon the House of Assembly of a State to remove a Governor for gross misconduct under section 170 of the 1979 Constitution[15]

Balarabe Musa after the impeachment committee found the Governor guilty of eight out of the ten charges preferred against him by the State House of Assembly. The author regretted that the “no jurisdiction” stance taken by the High Court and the Court of Appeal was prevented from being tested at the Supreme Court due to technicalities and delays inherent in the Nigeria Legal System.

The learned author then examined section 170(11)[16] of the 1979 Constitution which defines gross misconduct as a grave violation or breach of the provisions of the Constitution or misconduct of such nature as amounts in the opinion of House of Assembly to gross misconduct. He opined that there are two types of gross misconduct - the type that touches on violation or breach of the provisions of the Constitution and the other type which is left at the discretion of the State legislature to determine. The learned author posed a question as to who is competent under the Constitution to decide whether the provisions of the Constitution or of any law have been violated

Impeachment preferred against the then Governor of Kaduna State and argued that none of the grounds was weighty enough to attract impeachment proceedings against him.

The book covers only the impeachment process that took place in Kaduna State in the second Republic and under the 1979 Constitution of Nigeria. The latest principles of law relating to impeachment proceeding were not captured for obvious reasons. The author’s opinion that only a court of competent jurisdiction should adjudicate over the issue as to whether a Governor or Deputy Governor is guilty of gross misconduct, clearly missed the mark. If the argument is accepted, the possibility of impeaching any political office holder will be very remote judging from the length of time cases usually last in courts in Nigeria, starting from High Court to the Supreme Court except of course if the High Court’s decision is final and not appealable.

The author’s opinion is also punctured by the fact that the American Presidential Constitution which Nigeria extensively borrowed, allows the Senate to sit as a court over the impeachment of the President.

Nwabueze, in his book Nigeria’s Presidential Constitution treated the subject under two issues - violation of the limitation on power of impeachment and Abuse of impeachment procedure.

On violation of the limitation on power of impeachment, the author begins by saying that the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly is empowered in accordance with prescribed procedure to remove the Presidentor Governor by impeachment for gross misconduct in the performance of the functions of his office.

The definition of gross misconduct under sections 132(11) and 170(11) of the 1979 Constitution should not be misconstrued to have given the legislature the discretion in deciding what constitutes a misconduct.

Next is the examination of the provision that “on proceedings or determination of the committee or of the National Assembly or any matter relating thereto shall be entertained or questioned in any court” as provided under sections 132(10) & 179(10) . The author opined that the provisions must be taken to refer to a determination which the Assembly has power to make and that any such determination is amenable to judicial control.

On abuse of impeachment procedure the learned author dwelt on the [17] [18] the impeachment created an impeachment fever all over the country thereby awakening in the legislative Houses the realization of their power over the seemingly almighty chief executives, and a desire to demonstrate it.

The author reasoned that threats of impeachment in 11 out of 19 States of Nigeria[19] within a period of one year would seem to suggest a motive and a purpose other than that which it is designed. He advised that the impeachment power is not intended to serve such purely partisan or selfish purposes.

The book written in 1985 does not contain the latest principles of law relating to impeachment proceedings. It fails to treat or discuss the origin of impeachment process as well as the role of the judiciary in impeachment proceedings. It is the aim of this research to fill this vacuum.

Nwadueze, in his book “Constitutional Democracy In Africa”[20] discussed the issue of impeachment as part of checks and balances particularly in approval and that the President, Vice President and other civil officers are liable to impeachment before congress for treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanor and upon conviction to automatic dismissal from office.

The learned author opined that the power of impeachment is not meant to give congress a control over the President’s tenure otherwise such will destroy the independence of the executive, replacing it with the principle of executive responsibility to the legislature which characterizes the parliamentary executive of the Westminster type. The learned author appraises the impeachment of President Johnson of America in 1968, the first of its kind and described it as disreputable perversion of power for purely partisan motive as the ground of impeachment (removal of secretary of State without Senate’s approval) does not fall into the generis of treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanor.

Comparatively, the learned author observed that the power of impeachment under the 1979/99 Constitutions of Nigeria is indeed wider than in the American Constitution since it is available in respect of any violation of the Constitution or any gross misconduct by the President, though as a safeguard against abuse of power for partisan purposes, there is interposed between the President and the legislature, a judicial tribunal which must find against the

President before the legislature can then convict him by motion supported by the appropriate majority.

The learned author finally discussed the confrontation between the Legislative Assembly and the Executive particularly as it happened in Kaduna State during the 2nd Republic, the major confrontation being the impeachment of Balarabe Musa, the first Executive Governor of Kaduna State by the Kaduna State House of Assembly.

The book written in 2004, no doubt does not contain the latest principles relating to impeachment proceedings as decided by the superior courts of record. For instance it was only in 2007 that the Supreme Court held in the


case of Inakoju & Ors. v. Adeleke & Ors. that the courts have jurisdiction to inquire whether the procedure for impeachment outlined in the Constitution[21] [22] was duly followed without which the impeachment would be

Bhaswan, et al, the authors of World Constitutions - A Comparative Study , while writing on world Constitutions including that of the United States, discussed inter alia the removal of the President of the United States through impeachment, and this could be done before the expiry of the normal term. They discussed the procedure for impeachment. According to the authors, it is the House of Representatives that kicks of the impeachment process by adopting a resolution of articles of impeachment, charging the President with certain high crimes and chooses leaders to direct the prosecution before the Senate which acts as a judicial tribunal for impeachment. The meeting of the Senate is then presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Senate may convict the President by two- third majority of its members present and voting.

The authors observed that the method of impeachment is not an easy one and thus during the long constitutional history of the United States, only once in 1868, President Johnson was subjected to the process of impeachment but [23]

declared him not guilty by 55 to 45 votes on perjury and by 50 votes each on obstruction ofjustice, thereby escaping impeachment.

The authors traced the origin of impeachment to England dating back to the medieval times and that impeachment afforded the only means whereby an adviser of the crown could be brought to account by the House of Commons who usually heard the charges and gave its verdict accordingly. The authors observed that American constitution makers were very much impressed by the impeachment procedure in England and so provided for it in the American Constitution as well. The learned authors finally advised that impeachment procedure ought not be utilized except as a last resort.

The book though relevant to the present research particularly as regards the origin of impeachment process, it fails to take care of the basic principles of impeachment process as it affects Nigeria. Though it treats the procedure for impeachment in United States, it has no answer to the process and procedure for impeachment in Nigeria which the present research has taken care of.

Oguche’s article Challenges of use of State of Emergency In Democratic


Governance: Plateau and Ekiti Experiences centres on challenges of state of emergency in democratic governance, it however discussed extensively, the impeachment process that took place in Ekiti State and which ousted the regime of Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State in 2006 during the presidency of Olusegun

Obasanjo, and which sparked of the declaration of state of emergency in Ekiti State.

The author[24] [25] narrated a vivid account of how on 26th of September, 2006, the 26 - man Ekiti State House of Assembly passed a motion to serve notice of impeachment on the Ekiti State Governor, Peter Ayodele Fayose and his Deputy Mrs. Abiodun Christine Olujimi alleging gross misconduct against the dual. Five charges were raised against Governor Fayose as against two for his Deputy. In all 24 out of the 26 man Assembly were in support of the motion for impeachment. The notice of impeachment was delivered by express mail to the accused duo and they were expected to respond within 14 days. According to the learned author, on receipt of the notice, Fayose filed an exparte motion in the State High Court to stop allegedly made up of Fayose’s family relations and cronies and which the St ate House of Assembly objected to unsuccessfully as the Chief Judge went ahead to inaugurate, giving the excuse that as a Judge with limited contacts with ordinary folks, he was not expected to know everybody’s backgrounds. He dismissed the allegations as jokers.

The Chief Judge was suspended by the House of Assembly after his refusal to change the panel of seven as well as refusal to appear before the House to answer to a charge of official misconduct. An Acting Chief Judge was appointed after the first appointee declined. Meanwhile the panel of seven headed by Remi Bamgboye still went ahead to meet on the impeachment process. The panel discharged the Governor and his Deputy from all allegations without taking oral evidence. Meanwhile the newly appointed Acting Chief Judge announced a new panel of seven hearded by Bamidele Omotosho who after taking evidence from witnesses sent their report to the House who in turn called on members to vote accordingly. The speaker’s gavel fell in the House formalizing the impeachment of Ayodele Fayose and his Deputy Abiodun Olujimi.

The learned author finally analysed how this purported impeachment led to break down of law and order as Fayose from his hide out was still claiming to be the Governor whereas the Acting Governor, (the Speaker) was also claiming to be in charge necessitating the then President Olusegun Obasanjo to step in and declared a state of emergency in Ekiti State.

The author merely discussed the impeachment process that took place in Ekiti State and which led to the eventual declaration of State of emergency in that State. Although the article is relevant to this research in some ways, however, it does not cover the main rudiments of impeachment proceedings which the present research/project has improved upon.

1.8   Organisational Structure

Chapter One introduces the research and titled General Introduction. It highlights the background of the study, statement of the research problem, justification and objectives of research as well as scope and methodology applied in writing the project. Eight literatures are reviewed as well.

Chapter Two discusses the historical development and conceptual clarifications of some key terms involved in the research. It commences with introduction and historical development of impeachment process as well as meanings of impeachment and gross misconduct. The chapter ends with conclusion.

Chapter Three treats the grounds and procedure for impeachment. Political and constitutional grounds are examined extensively. The chapter highlights the procedure for impeachment and discusses the issues bordering on notice of impeachment and service of same, quorum requirement, panel of seven-man investigation committee as well as the venue of impeachment process. The chapter finally ends with a conclusion of the topic

Chapter Four focuses on Data analysis and commences with an introduction of the subject. It discusses and shows the methodology of data analysis employed and result of same. The chapter finally ends with a conclusion.

Chapter Five focuses on the roles of courts and other institutions during impeachment proceedings. The Institutions discussed include the security agencies, the media and the electorate. The chapter winds up with a conclusion. Chapter Six deals with the summary and conclusion of the subject. It highlights the findings and the recommendation made by the researcher.

[1]     The impeachment of Rashidi Ladoja was done in D’Rovans Hotel, Ibadan, Oyo State.

[2]      Dapianlong v. Dariye [2007] 8 NWLR (pt. 1036) p. 332

[3]  The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

[4]   [2007] 1 SCNJ 1

[5]  Inakoju v. Adeleke & Ors. (supra), Dapianlong v. Dariye [2007] 7 NWLR (pt. 1036) 332

1.5         Scope of the Research

[6]  Dalhatu M.B., What Is Constitutional Law? ABU Press Ltd. Zaria [2008] pp. 44-49


Others wherein the High Court declined jurisdiction by holding inter alia as follows: “My jurisdiction has been taken away by the combined effect of

[7]  [1982] 3 NCLR 439

[8]  [2007] 4 NWLR (pt. 1025) 423, [2007] 1 SCNJ 1

Madaki, in his article “An Examination of the Jurisdiction of Courts to Determine Impeachment Proceedings under the 1999 Constitution of

[9]   Madaki A.M. “An Examination of the Jurisdiction of Courts to Determine Impeachment Proceedings under the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria” In: Agom A. et al (eds) Ogebe & The Law, Tamaza Publishing Co. Ltd., Zaria [2010] pp. 143-160

[10]  Ibid

[11]  Ibid

The learned author discussed several cases that highlighted the anomalies committed by the legislators while purportedly impeaching their targets. He concluded by commending the role of courts in helping to sustain the

[12]   Mowoe K., Constitutional Law In Nigeria, Malthouse Press Ltd. Lagos [2008] pp. 170 - 174

phrase ‘gross misconduct’ as defined is a subjective matter in the hands of National Assembly which may sometimes be to the detriment of the President or Vice President when faced with a recalcitrant legislature.

[13]  (1982) 3 NCLR 450

[14]  Umaru A. Politics and Law Making In Nigeria A.B.U. Press, Zaria (1994) pp. 133-138

[15]  In pari materia with section 188 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)

through the impeachment process is not a law making power.

The learned author then viewed critically the procedure taken by the Kaduna State Legislature in impeaching the then Governor of Kaduna State,

[16] Now section 188(1) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria

by a person or authority. He opined that such powers are vested in the courts under section 6(1)(a)&(b) of the Constitution being a judicial question. He finally ended the chapter by examining the ten Articles of

[17]  Nwabueze B.O., Nigeria’s Presidential Constitution, Longman Inc., New York (1985) pp. 320 - 326

[18] In pari materia with sections 143(11) & 188(11) of the 1999 Constitution

impeachment of the first Executive Governor of Kaduna State, Alhaji Balarabe Musa and its concomitant effect on the political land scape of the country during the defunct 2nd Republic of Nigeria. According to the author,

[19]  As Nigeria was then constituted

[20]  Nwabueze B., Constitutional Democracy In Africa, Vol. 4 Spectrum Books Ltd, Ibadan, (2004) pp. 120 - 130

American presidential system of government. According to him, under the American Constitution, the President’s power in regard to appointments and the making of treaties is “checked” by the requirement of the Senate’s

[21]  (2007) 1 SCNJ 1

[22]  Section 188 thereof declared invalid, null and void and unconstitutional. The present research takes care of this lacuna.

[23] Bhagwan V. et al, World Constitutions - A Comparative Study, Sterling Publishers Ltd. New Delhi, Tenth Edn, (2013) pp. 139 - 175

could not be carried out for want of a required majority in the Senate. They opined that President Nixon would have been impeached in case he had not tendered resignation. In the same vein, Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on the charges of perjury and obstruction of justice but Senate

[24]  Oguche S. “Challenges of use of State of Emergency In Democratic Governance: Plateau and Ekiti Experiences” In: Azinge (ed) State of Emergency In Nigeria: Law and Politics NIALS, Lagos (2013) pp. 308 at 351-358

[25]  Quoting Mobolaji Aluko - “The State of Emergency In Ekiti State And The Nebuchadnezzar Non-option” available at http:www.dawodu.com/aluko149.htm, Accessed on 8/8/2012

the impeachment process, but two judges declined to take the exparte application one after the other. The third judge who eventually agreed to take the application, promptly dismissed Fayose’s application as being alien in law.

After the expiration of the notice of impeachment, the State House of Assembly went ahead to instruct the Chief Judge of Ekiti State to form a seven - man panel to conduct the formal impeachment investigation of the Governor and his deputy and which the Chief Judge did and actually announced a seven-man panel

Place an Order Now↓



No data found...

 Locate Us

Number 95,
Gaa-akanbi Ilorin,
Ilorin Kwara State,


Subscribe to Receive Topics

©E-Projectmatters.com || 2022
Designed by: AEMMI