FOUR REASONS WHY FEMI FALANA MIGHT BE WRONG?
#electionresults2023
#INECElectionResult
It's been reported that Mr Femi Falana SAN says 25% of votes in the FCT is not needed to win the presidential election as per Section 134 CFRN (may be 133 in your copy) because of Section 299.
#electionresults2023
#INECElectionResult
It's been reported that Mr Femi Falana SAN says 25% of votes in the FCT is not needed to win the presidential election as per Section 134 CFRN (may be 133 in your copy) because of Section 299.
With due respect, I think the Learned Silk might be wrong. Why? Calm down, read on.
The SAN says the courts have held that based on Section 299 CFRN, FCT qualifies as a state. The first problem with this is that there is no decision of any court stating that FCT qualifies...
The SAN says the courts have held that based on Section 299 CFRN, FCT qualifies as a state. The first problem with this is that there is no decision of any court stating that FCT qualifies...
...as a state for purposes of the presidential election.
Indeed, SS. 299 and 301 CFRN say FCT should be treated as a state for clearly listed purposes, BUT NOT for the presidential election. And all the cases I can find on that section have nothing to do with the presidential...
Indeed, SS. 299 and 301 CFRN say FCT should be treated as a state for clearly listed purposes, BUT NOT for the presidential election. And all the cases I can find on that section have nothing to do with the presidential...
...election. See OKOYODE v. FCDA (2005) LPELR-41123(CA); PANYA v. PRESIDENT, FRN & ORS (2018) LPELR-44573(CA); FAWEHINMI & ORS v. BABANGIDA & ORS (2003) LPELR-1255(SC).
Finally, Atiku alleged before the Court of Appeal in 2019 that Buhari did not win 25% of LAWFUL votes cast...
Finally, Atiku alleged before the Court of Appeal in 2019 that Buhari did not win 25% of LAWFUL votes cast...
...in 2/3 of the states and the FCT. The emphasis is on the word LAWFUL, because BUHARI actually had more than 25% in the FCT. So, interpretation of S. 134 was not an issue in that case. Atiku lost at the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court affirmed his loss later.
The...
The...
...closest case I can find on the issue is Awolowo vs. Shagari, based on the 1979 presidential elections and the Electoral Decree of 1977. However, the said Decree mentions only 2/3 of states; IT DOES NOT MENTION the FCT at all. The FCT had just been created by the FCT Act...
...of 1976 then. So, this case cannot be applied to the 1999 CFRN, too.
The problematic S. 134(2b) says โhe has not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abujaโ.
The problematic S. 134(2b) says โhe has not less than one-quarter of the votes cast at the election each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abujaโ.
Some say this means 2/3 of 37 states because FCT should be treated as the 37th state because of S. 299 CFRN. 2/3 of 37 is 24.6. Do not forget that S. 3 CFRN lists all the 36 states and creates FCT separately. So, when the framers were drafting Section 134, they could not...
...have intended a fractional number like 24.6 as the needed 2/3 because this creates more problems than it solves.
Some say FCT is the 24th state after taking only 23 states from the 36. This betrays the fact that those who hold this view know a whole number like 24 is...
Some say FCT is the 24th state after taking only 23 states from the 36. This betrays the fact that those who hold this view know a whole number like 24 is...
...needed instead of a fractional number like 24.6. The problem with this view is that it has rewritten S. 134 completely instead of interpreting it. Had this been intended, S. 34 would stated at least 23 states and or plus the FCT.
To my mind, the best interpretation is...
To my mind, the best interpretation is...
...ยผ (25%) votes in at least 24 states plus another 25% votes in the FCT. It is the same even if you win 35 states without having 25% in the FCT. I will give you FOUR reasons.
One, 2/3 of 36 states is 24, a whole number which does not create the problem of having to...
One, 2/3 of 36 states is 24, a whole number which does not create the problem of having to...
...determine which state is 0.6th of a state when we use 2/3 of 37 states.
Two, S. 134(3b) says โโฆone among the remaining candidates who has a majority of votes in the highest number of Statesโฆโ without mentioning FCT at all, thereby showing that S. 134 treats โStatesโ...
Two, S. 134(3b) says โโฆone among the remaining candidates who has a majority of votes in the highest number of Statesโฆโ without mentioning FCT at all, thereby showing that S. 134 treats โStatesโ...
...differently from FCT. There is a reason for the clear omission here, no?
Three, FCT, unlike other states, has no governor or house of assembly of its own. By SS. 299 and 301 CFRN, the President is the Governor of FCT, and the National Assembly is the House of Assembly...
Three, FCT, unlike other states, has no governor or house of assembly of its own. By SS. 299 and 301 CFRN, the President is the Governor of FCT, and the National Assembly is the House of Assembly...
...of the FCT. So, instead of making the candidate who wins majority votes in the FCT the Governor of the FCT and creating a power problem between him and the President, the President is made the Governor of the FCT.
So, S. 134 simply wants to ensure that whoever will be the...
So, S. 134 simply wants to ensure that whoever will be the...
...Governor of the FCT (that is President) has at least 25% of all votes cast in the FCT. It is all about fair representation of the people of the FCT. In most cases, the President delegates his power over the FCT to FCT Minister, a position El-Rufai of Kaduna State once filled.
In fact S. 293(2b) CFRN has a similar requirement to the effect that membership of the executive committee of a political party must reflect the political character of Nigeria by having members from at least 2/3 of the states and the FCT. Because FCT is a special...
...territory, it is not counted as a state for this purpose as there must be someone from there on that committee.
Four, Awolowo vs. Shagari tells us that if the FCT is not needed, it would not have been included at all just as the Electoral Decree of 1977 excluded it even...
Four, Awolowo vs. Shagari tells us that if the FCT is not needed, it would not have been included at all just as the Electoral Decree of 1977 excluded it even...
...though there was legally an FCT at the time vide the FCT Act of 1976 which came into force on 4 February 1976. The Electoral Decree of 1977 came into force on 26 July 1979.
Note that the 1979 constitution created the same FCT, but that constitution did not come into effect...
Note that the 1979 constitution created the same FCT, but that constitution did not come into effect...
...until 1 October 1979 while the 1979 election was in August 1979. Besides, per S. 262 of that constitution, the new FCT created by its S. 3 will not take effect until a date stated by the President in an Executive Order.
I stand to be corrected.
I stand to be corrected.
Loading suggestions...