A Lagos State High Court has ruled that the removal of Mudashiru Obasa as Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly was unlawful and unconstitutional.
Delivering judgment on Wednesday, the presiding judge, Justice Yetunde Pinheiro of the set aside the proceedings and resolutions of the House dated January 13, 2025, during which Obasa was removed from office.
Obasa had filed a suit against the House of Assembly and the newly appointed Speaker, Mojisola Meranda, challenging the legality of his removal.
The suit, filed on February 12, 2025, by his counsel, Chief Afolabi Fashanu (SAN), contended that Obasa’s removal by 36 lawmakers occurred while the Assembly was on recess and while he was out of the country.
He urged the court to declare the process unlawful, arguing that the sitting was invalid as it was convened without the Speaker’s authority or any formal delegation of power.
His legal challenge was based on nine grounds, drawing on the interpretation of various provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as well as the Rules and Standing Orders governing the Lagos State House of Assembly.
In her judgment, Justice Pinheiro held that only the leaders of the House of Assembly have the authority to write to the Speaker to convene a meeting, and that the Chief Whip is not considered a leader for this purpose.
The court noted that under Order 7 of the House Rules, there is a defined hierarchy, and Rule 30, which relates to the authority of the Chief Whip, does not confer such powers on him.
Accordingly, the court held that all steps taken toward reconvening the meeting were invalid, and that the fact a majority of members voted was inconsequential.
“The defendant cannot validly remove the Speaker without complying with Order 2, Rule 9 of the Lagos State House of Assembly Rules,” the court held.
Justice Pinheiro therefore declared the purported sitting of the members of the Lagos State House of Assembly, the purported removal of the claimant as Speaker, and the purported installation of the second defendant as illegal, null and void
Earlier, while dismissing the preliminary objections for lacking merit, Justice Pinheiro held that “a court of law can intervene where the provisions of the Constitution have not been met during any proceedings of the House of Assembly.”
Relying on Usman v. Kaduna State House of Assembly, the court held that “it must be noted that in cases where the Constitution provides a procedure for the removal of a Speaker and there is a lacuna, the court will intervene.”
The court also relied on Agbaso v. Imo State House of Assembly and the recent Supreme Court decision involving the Rivers State House of Assembly and the Government of Rivers State.
The court agreed with the claimant that the facts of the case raised justiciable issues that the court could adjudicate upon.
Consequently, both preliminary objections were dismissed.
The court further awarded N500,000 in damages for the unlawful and illegal removal of the claimant and for the psychological embarrassment caused to him.
