- In the motion, Obasa, through his counsel led by Chief Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, sought an order from the court for an accelerated hearing of the suit.
Embattled Lagos lawmaker, Mudashiru Obasa, has instituted a legal action against the Lagos State House of Assembly over his removal as speaker.
Obasa approached a State High Court in Ikeja to challenge his impeachment, claiming his removal when the Assembly was on recess is illegal.
The lawmaker, in a motion dated February 12, 2025, is suing the Assembly and the new Speaker, Mojisola Meranda, for his impeachment.
In the motion, Obasa, through his counsel led by Chief Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, sought an order from the court for an accelerated hearing of the suit.
Obasa, who was out of the country, was removed as the Lagos Assembly speaker on January 13, 2025, by 36 lawmakers.
He protested his impeachment upon return to the country, insisting that he remained the speaker.
Among the relief sought by the lawmaker include an order of the court fixing a date for the expeditious hearing of the originating summons, and abridging the time within which the defendants may file their response by way of counter-affidavits/written addresses to seven days after the hearing and determination of the application.
In the motion filed at the court on Friday, Obasa also sought an order of the court abridging the time within which the plaintiff may file its reply of points of law to three days.
The embattled lawmaker’s application is predicated on nine grounds, among which is the interpretation of sections 36; 90; 92(2)(c); 101 and 311 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As amended) vis-à-vis Order V, Rule 18(2) and Order II, Rule 9(1)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii)(viii) of Rules and Standing Order of the Lagos State House of Assembly.
Part of the motion reads, “This action challenges the constitutionality of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly to sit during recess without the Speaker reconvening the House or giving any other person powers to reconvene the House.
“Public interest requires the case to be heard and determined speedily and expeditiously so that legislative activities in the state are not stalled.
“The legality of the continued sitting of the 1st defendant under the present leadership in violation of the aforementioned laws and rules calls for an urgent determination.
“This Honourable Court is imbued with inherent powers to grant accelerated hearing and abridgment of time.”
However, a date has not been fixed for the suit as of the time of filing this report.
Discussion about this post