Politics
Section 84 (12): To Be Or Not To Be
In the original version of the Electoral Act, Section 84 (12) comes with a sub-heading titled: “Political Appointee Not Eligible as a Voting Delegate or Aspirant.” Using this as a guide, it becomes crystal clear that the intent of the lawmakers with the introduction of Section 84 (12) was to make it impossible for a political appointee to aspire for elective office whilst still holding on to his political appointment. I honestly cannot see how this piece of legislation amounts to an amendment of the Constitution through the backdoor as some have suggested.
The definition of Section 318 of the Constitution which clarifies those to be regarded as part of the public service of the Federation also made similar provisions for public service of the State. Judicial authorities abound that political appointees hold their offices at the pleasure of the appointor and they are not civil or public servants as provided for in the Constitution. Thus, there is no apparent or implied conflict between Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act and any of the provisions of the Constitution highlighted above, the rationale being to ensure that those who hold public office are not exposed to any situation that may lead to a conflict of interest.
In the same vein, section 84 (12) does not infringe upon the right to freely assemble and associate with other persons as provided for in Section 40 of the Constitution or the right to form a political party as provided for under Section 221 thereof. The Constitution for instance provides the right to freedom of movement for every citizen, but to travel out of Nigeria, you need a passport, without which you would not be allowed to board the plane. It is in that passport that the travelling visa to your country of destination will be imposed. The Courts have also held that the requirement for a passport as a condition to travel does not infringe upon the constitutional right of movement
In the case of Awolowo v. Ministry of Internal Affairs, a similar concept was elucidated upon by the Supreme Court, when the appellant, in that case, the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, SAN, was standing trial for treasonable felony. He engaged the service of a British lawyer, Mr. E.F.N. Gratiaen to defend him. On arrival in Lagos, MrGratiaen was denied entry into Nigeria by the Federal Ministry of Internal affairs. The court had to determine the import of Section 21 (5) (c) of the then 1960 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (now section 36 (6) (c ) of the 1999 Constitution, which provided that “an accused person is entitled to defend himself in person or by a legal practitioner of his own choice”. Chief Awolowo contended in that case that he was entitled to be represented by any lawyer of his choice whether indigenous or British.
Thus, the order prohibiting his lawyer, Mr Gratiaen, was ultra vires and against his right to a fair hearing. He, therefore, prayed the court to grant an order of injunction, restraining the defendant from preventing the said Mr. Gratiaen (QC) or any other British counsel who might be the counsel of his choice, from entering Nigeria to defend him in the pending charge. On the other hand, the defendants, in that case, argued that the provisions of section 13 of the Immigration Act which provides that “Notwithstanding anything in this ordinance contained, the Governor-General may, in his absolute discretion, prohibit the entry into Nigeria of any person, not being a native of Nigeria”, gives the ministry the power to refuse a non-Nigerian entry into the country. More so, in the exercise of the right conferred by Section 21 (5) (c) of the 1960 Constitution, the legal representative must be a qualified person entitled to a right of audience in Nigerian courts. Secondly, he must be available to take up the case, and therefore must be able to enter Nigeria as of right and must be a Nigerian.
The High Court of the federal territory of Lagos, per Justice Udo Udoma held that based on the above provisions, the legal representative chosen by an accused person if resident outside Nigeria must be a person who could enter Nigeria as of right and must not be anyone under any disability. In the words of the judge: “I must state at once that I do not accept as sound proposition the submission that the provision contained in Section 21 (5) (c ) of the Constitution, liberally interpreted, can be construed to entitle anyone to bring a Counsel from the United Kingdom to defend him in a criminal charge. To accept that interpretation, would be to strain language. The Constitution is a Nigerian Constitution, meant for Nigerians in Nigeria. It only runs in Nigeria. The natural consequence of this is that the legal representative contemplated in Section 21 (5) (c) ought to be someone in Nigeria, and not outside it.” This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court in the appeal filed against it by Chief Awolowo. In a similar vein, Section 84 (12) has not stopped any citizen from contesting election but it has imposed a condition upon political appointees to first step down from their political position to seek elective office. There is no contradiction at all in this laudable provision with the Constitution.
Most political appointees are paid one form of emolument or allowance or the other by the government, with specific responsibilities to perform. Thus, even apart from the conflict of retaining an executive position and seeking elective office, how does a person occupying a political office abandon his responsibilities for which he is being paid to embark upon campaigns at the expense of the people? What justification can we give for retaining a person on the payroll of the government who already has his eyes on another assignment? Political appointees and persons in public service of the Federation and of the States are two separate and distinct classes of persons. While those in public service have not less than thirty days ahead of their party primaries to resign to contest an election, political appointees must resign before they can become voting delegates or be voted for in their party primaries or congresses. The Constitution stipulates that public office holders resign “at least” thirty days before the elections they are interested in, which presupposes that such public officers could indeed resign earlier than the 30 days, however, the Electoral Act stipulates that political appointees must resign before party primaries/congresses where candidates are to emerge.
The question to ask then is whether the National Assembly has by Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act negated the constitutional stipulation of “at least 30 days”? Certainly not. The two concepts do not oppose themselves at all. For civil and public servants, the Constitution demands that they resign not less than thirty days prior to any election for which they seek to contest whilst Section 84 (12) simply prohibits political appointees from participating in elections to be conducted at the conventions and congresses of their political parties whilst still retaining their political appointments. In Section 228 (a), the Constitution states that the National Assembly “… may by law provide guidelines and rules to ensure internal democracy within political parties, including making laws for the conduct of the party primaries, party congresses and party convention”. Under and by virtue of Section 4 of the same Constitution, “the National Assembly shall have the power to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the Federation or any part thereof”. What then, if one may ask, could be the ‘offence’ of the National Assembly in fulfilling its mandate as directed by the Constitution?
To my mind, there is really no need for us to split hairs on this simple matter of interpretation of the Constitution and the Electoral Act. Unless as suggested by Mr. Femi Falana, SAN and many others, the executive arm has an axe to grind with the legislature over this very harmless piece of legislation, there can be no basis for the jubilation that has greeted the judgment of the Umuahia Federal High Court by the executive. We must sanitize the electoral space to remove all vestiges of manipulation and land mines. It is not in our best interest for those that we pay to perform certain duties to abscond from their sacred responsibilities in order to actualise their personal ambitions to seek elective office. They owe us the duty of fairness to surrender our mandate granted to them through their appointments should they aspire to contest any election. It is gratifying that the National Assembly and other stakeholders of our electoral system have decided to join the case to explore further interpretation by the appellate courts. That is commendable indeed or else we may soon have in our hands a ridiculous situation whereby the Chairman of INEC or even the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria may seek to contest election whilst still holding on to their appointments.
By: Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa
Adegboruwa, a constitutional lawyer, is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).
Mr Okonkwo made the announcement on his X (formerly Twitter) account on yesterday, expressing gratitude for what he called Alhaji Abubakar’s show of faith in him.
“I give God all the glory for being appointed by His Excellency Atiku Abubakar as his spokesperson. I thank His Excellency for the immense confidence reposed in me,” Mr Okonkwo said.
The politician credited Alhaji Abubakar with championing dialogue over conflict within party ranks.
He noted that the former vice president favours conversation and compromise when party associates raise genuine worries, rather than dismissing their concerns.
“Rather than take offence at associates for expressing genuine reservations about any action taken, His Excellency always opts for dialogue and compromise that engender solutions to problems,” Mr Okonkwo stated.
According to him, recent talks with Alhaji Abubakar and other ADC leaders tackled worries about South-East political representation within the limits of the Electoral Act, 2026, and the current political climate. He said the discussions produced guarantees for the region’s interests despite existing constraints.
Mr Okonkwo also acknowledged the work of Dr. Kashim Imam; former ADC National Chairman, Ralphs Nwosu; Ekene Onwuka, Alhaji Abubakar’s Senior Special Assistant on Special Duties, in preparing the party for next year’s elections. He thanked his loved ones and supporters for their support and prayers.
“I still covet your prayers for wisdom, courage, provision and protection needed to carry out this challenging responsibility, which will usher in a glorious and great Nigeria,” he added.
The appointment arrives weeks after Mr Okonkwo publicly attacked the ADC’s pick for running mate in 2027. He’d warned that choosing a vice-presidential candidate from the South-South would worsen what he sees as political neglect of the South-East, a region without a president or vice president since 1999.
Despite Mr Okonkwo’s objections, the ADC later announced former Rivers State Governor and ex-Minister of Transportation, Mr Rotimi Amaechi, as Alhaji Abubakar’s running mate following the ex-vice president’s clinching of the party’s presidential nomination.
The Senate has defended the passage of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Alteration) (State Police) Bill, 2026, saying the proposed creation of state police is driven by national consensus and the country’s security needs rather than political considerations.
The Red Chamber passed the bill last Wednesday after more than two-thirds of senators voted in support.
In a statement issued yesterday by the Directorate of Media and Public Affairs, Office of the Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele described the bill as “a child of necessity and not of political expediency as well as a product of national consensus and not of cynicism.”
The senate leader said the proposal to establish state police was a matter of urgent public importance that could not be delayed because of political interests, given the country’s security challenges.
He explained that the proposal did not originate recently but emerged from memoranda submitted to the Senate Ad-hoc Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution.
According to him, the proposal underwent extensive consultations and rigorous scrutiny because of its sensitive nature.
Bamidele said the National Assembly consulted widely with the Executive, the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, the Conference of Speakers of State Legislatures of Nigeria, the leadership of the Nigeria Police and other stakeholders before passing the bill.
He added that during the public hearings conducted across the six geopolitical zones in July 2025, participants overwhelmingly supported the creation of state police.
“At each level of our consultation, nearly all stakeholders embraced the State Police Bill in the light of stark realities we are facing today,” he said.
The Senate leader noted that recommendations from the Nigeria Police contributed to the bill, particularly on accountability and oversight mechanisms aimed at preventing abuse of state police by political actors.
According to him, the police’s support for the proposal underscores its national significance in tackling insecurity at the state and local levels.
Bamidele also said the bill received broad bipartisan backing in both chambers of the National Assembly.
“Even though the APC is the majority, there are members of opposition parties — PDP, ADC, NDC and Labour Party — that exercised their discretion in favour of the Bill, mainly in the national interest and not on parochial basis.
“In the Senate, for instance, 84 out of 109 members voted clause by clause in support of the Bill. This accounted for 77.06 per cent approval at the Senate alone,” he said.
He argued that national security should transcend political affiliations, saying political actors in other countries often set aside partisan interests to support initiatives that strengthen security.
Bamidele called on opposition parties to contribute constructive ideas that would promote peace and stability, adding that they have a responsibility to offer alternatives that would strengthen the country.
“Even when they disagree on some grounds, they are under obligations to provide credible and useful ideas that can make our nation better and greater. Unfortunately, they have not passed this critical test of opposition democracy,” he said.
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has called on Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, to refer allegations of the diversion or non-accounting of over ?6.3 billion in constituency project funds to anti-corruption agencies for investigation and possible prosecution.
The group also urged the National Assembly leadership to ensure that anyone found culpable is prosecuted where sufficient admissible evidence exists, while all diverted or unaccounted public funds are recovered and paid into the treasury.
In a letter dated June 27, 2026, and signed by its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, SERAP said the allegations were contained in the Auditor-General of the Federation’s 2022 Annual Report, published on September 9, 2025.
The organisation disclosed this in a statement signed and released by Oluwadare, yesterday.
SERAP also asked Akpabio and Abbas to disclose the identities of contractors and companies, including their shareholders and beneficial owners, that allegedly received constituency project funds but failed to execute the projects.
It gave the National Assembly seven days to act on its recommendations, warning that it would institute legal proceedings should the legislature fail to respond.
“We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken within seven days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter. If we have not heard from you by then, SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions to compel you and the National Assembly to comply with our request in the public interest,” the letter stated.
It said, “The allegations involve several federal ministries, departments and agencies, including the Environmental Health Registration Council of Nigeria (EHORECON); the Federal College of Animal Health and Production Technology, Volm; the Federal Polytechnic, Udana; the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP); and the National Institute of Legislative and Democratic Studies (NILDS).
“The Auditor-General identified numerous cases of payments into private bank accounts, contracts awarded without due process, payments for contracts not executed or services not rendered, undocumented expenditures, inflated contracts, procurement irregularities and failures to account for public funds, recommending in each case that the funds be recovered and remitted to the treasury.
“According to the 2022 audited report, contained in pages 367 to 396, the Environmental Health Registration Council of Nigeria (EHORECON or Council) Abuja paid over ‘N22 million [N22,944,565.16] into the private account of some members of staff of the Council from the Constituency Projects Fund Account.
“There ‘was no evidence of the utilization of the funds and no explanations on the purpose for the payment of such amount into the individual accounts.”
SERAP added, “The Council (EHORECON) also in 2021 ‘awarded suspicious consultancy contracts of over N12 million [N12,030,818.29] for the development of Modern Abattoirs in Kebbi State and the supervision of 7 projects in Kebbi, Jigawa, and Headquarters Abuja.
“The money was to ‘produce bills of quantity, architectural design, structural design, mechanical design, and electrical designs for the contracts and supervision.’ But ‘the ‘items could not be found.’”
Altogether, SERAP said the Auditor-General’s 2022 report alleged EHORECON paid more than ?1.8 billion in constituency project funds through questionable transactions.
For the Federal College of Animal Health and Production Technology, Vom, SERAP said the institution “in 2022 reportedly ‘paid over N279 million [N279,700,500.00] to 3 contractors to empower and train youths in selected vocational areas in Borgu and Kontagora, Niger State, train women and youths in entrepreneurship in Niger East Senatorial District and to train youths and women in agro production and self-reliance in Barki Ladi/Riyom Federal Constituency, Plateau State.
“But the money was paid to the contractors without any document.’”
Other irregularities involving the college include another ?279.7 million in mobilisation fees allegedly paid without documentation, and more than ?629.4 million paid to unqualified contractors for various constituency projects without evidence of due process, contract advertisements or details of the contractors.
SERAP further alleged that the Auditor-General’s report identified multiple financial irregularities involving the Federal Polytechnic, Ukana, Akwa Ibom State, including over ?407 million allegedly paid as mobilisation fees without supporting documents, more than ?399 million paid to unqualified contractors, contracts allegedly inflated by over ?192 million, over ?279 million paid for projects not fully executed, ?50 million allegedly paid for an unexecuted borehole project, and more than ?83 million disbursed without the required documentation or approvals.
It also alleged that NAPTIP reportedly irregularly awarded contracts worth over ?21.8 million, paid more than ?176.8 million for logistics and consultancy services without supporting documents, and disbursed over ?89.6 million and ?4.4 million for projects that were allegedly not executed.
The report also alleged that NILDS failed to submit audited financial statements for 2012 to 2022, did not remit over ?15 million in stamp duties, and spent ?1.6 million without authorisation from the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation.
SERAP said the report recommended the recovery of the affected funds and their remittance to the treasury.
It argued that corruption in constituency projects disproportionately affects poor and vulnerable Nigerians by diverting resources meant for public services and development.
It added that the National Assembly, in exercising its oversight responsibilities, should demonstrate leadership by ensuring accountability in the management of constituency project funds.
The organisation further argued that the allegations, if established, would amount to breaches of the Constitution, the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 and the Public Procurement Act 2007, which require transparency, accountability and due process in the management of public resources.
-
News4 days ago
Rivers Court Jails Man Seven Years For Defiling Minor …Directs N5 Million Upkeep For Victim
-
News4 days ago
Alleged Coup Plot: DSS Docks Five For Hiding Sylva’s Whereabouts
-
Politics4 days ago
Atiku Names Kenneth Okonkwo As Spokesperson
-
Niger Delta4 days ago
24 Nigerian Universities Make 2026 THE Rankings … 4 S’South Versitieis Pull Through
-
News4 days agoFG To Replace NYSC Khaki With Adire
-
News4 days ago
BOI Unveils Maiden Impact Report, Disburses N644.9bn In 2025
-
News3 days agoFubara Seeks Full Resolution Of Bille Gas Leakage …Pledges Upgrade Of Community Health Centre
-
Women4 days ago
NAWOJ Seeks Partnership With Hotel Presidential On Summit