Lawyers Hail Retention Of Immunity Clause

Some lawyers in Lagos
last Thursday hailed the National Assembly for retaining the Immunity Clause for the president and governors in the Constitution.
The lawyers told newsmen in Lagos that the purpose of governance would be defeated, if the clause would be missing.
Our correspondent reports that the House of Representatives had recommended removal of Immunity Clause for the President, governors and their deputies from the 1999 Constitution.
However, the National Conference Committee of the National Assembly on Constitution Review yesterday retained the clause.
The committee also approved immunity for legislators in respect of words spoken or written in the exercise of their legislative duties.
The Chairman of the Lagos branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Alex Muoka, commended the decision, saying that it would help to maintain sanity in the nation’s political system.
He said that the clause was enshrined in the constitution to serve a purpose, adding that its aim would be defeated if scrapped.
“The Immunity Clause is for a purpose; leaders ought not to be distracted unduly in the cause of performing leadership roles.
“Undue distraction, however, does not mean constructive criticisms; in fact, leaders should encourage same, but I am talking about frivolous litigation.
“The purpose of the clause is to ensure that our leaders are not weighed down with responding to every suit, as this will warrant that they devote more time to attend courts, rather than focus on governance.
“Although several bodies have called for scrapping of the clause due to its abuse by some officers, we must be wary of throwing away the baby with the bath water,” Muoka said.
According to the chairman, a better approach will be to restrict its application instead of complete obliteration.
In the same vain, a lawyer and social critic, Mr Ogedi Ogu, hailed the National Assembly for retaining the clause.
He noted that the essence of the clause was to ensure that elected officials were not unnecessarily distracted with litigation.
He described as “lame”, arguments that such clause aided corruption.
Ogu said that presidents and governors could be tried after their tenures.
He noted that the clause was to protect the office of the president and that of the governor from public ridicule and unwarranted mischief.
The lawyer said that its removal would make mischief makers to distract the polity with unnecessary attacks.
“If we insist on trying them while in office, what time will they have to govern?
“The best approach is to keep a dossier on the officers involved and take on them after their tenures in office,” he said.
A constitutional lawyer, Mr Anthony Makolo, told NAN that the retention of the clause would protect the image of the country’s political system.
“If the clause is phased out, it will give rise to a situation where people, out of personal animosity and political considerations, begin to distract governance with frivolous court cases.
“Once a case is filed – whether it is frivolous or not – it must be defended; if not, judgment will be entered against the defendant.
“Now, you can imagine the level of distraction this can cause,’’ he said.
Makolo said that the retention of the clause would be in the interest of the general public.