Society Gists

The removal of Mudashiru Obasa as Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly has ignited a wave of reactions, with critics highlighting his controversial tenure and alleged misconduct.

Obasa, who addressed his supporters at the Speaker’s Lodge in Ikeja on Saturday, dismissed the process of his removal as unconstitutional, insisting that he remains the Speaker until “the right thing is done.” However, legal experts, political analysts, and concerned Lagosians have refuted his claims, asserting that his removal was both valid and inevitable.

Obasa argued that the lawmakers did not follow due process, citing his absence from the House on the day of his removal. However, legal experts have debunked this claims, emphasizing that the Nigerian Constitution does not require a Speaker to be present during their removal.

A legal practitioner stated, “According to Section 92(2)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, the Speaker can be removed by a resolution supported by the votes of not less that two-thirds majority of the members of the House. Obasa’s removal followed this process, and his argument is baseless.”

The expert further clarified that past removal of a former Speaker of the Lagos Assembly leaders, Rt. Hon. Jokotola Pelumi who was succeeded by Rt. Hon. Adeyemi Ikuforiji, also occurred in his absence, making Obasa’s claims of irregularity unfounded.

Regarding Obasa’s claim that the House erred as a Speaker cannot be impeached but only removed, the expert, after reviewing the motion for Obasa’s removal, disputed the former Speaker’s claim that he was impeached. According to him, Obasa was “removed,” not impeached, as clearly stated in the house resolution.

Furthermore, the expert emphasized that the law supports his removal, regardless of whether he was present or absent during the proceedings. That the House has the liberty to change its leadership as it so desires at anytime as long as the conditions stated by the constitution are adhered to, reminding everyone that the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is the grundnorm.

Political analysts and commentators have described Obasa’s removal as a turning point for the Lagos Assembly. Joseph Edgar, a prominent public affairs analyst, stated that Obasa’s defiant remarks undermine the integrity of the legislative arm of government.

“Obasa’s braggadocious response shows a lack of accountability. For someone with such serious allegations against him, his focus should be on clearing his name, not stirring unnecessary controversy,” Edgar said.

Political observers have highlighted the irony of Obasa’s situation. Many recall his role in the removal of previous leaders, describing his current predicament as “karma.”

Obasa’s removal is the inevitable consequence of his actions. His stance against local government autonomy and his insubordination towards leadership in the state made his position untenable.

Banire also pointed out that Obasa’s removal marks the end of his political influence, as his power was tied to his position as Speaker. “In politics, people worship power and money. Once he lost the office, his influence crumbled,” he added.

As the dust settles, the focus has shifted to holding Obasa accountable for the allegations against him. Legal experts and concerned citizens have called for thorough investigations into his tenure to restore public trust in the Lagos Assembly.

While Obasa ‘strongly believes’ he remains Speaker and hints at a possible legal battle, analysts believe his removal signals a need for the APC-led government to prioritize competence and accountability in electing legislative representatives to prevent similar controversies in the future.

For now, Lagosians await Obasa’s next move, but his valid removal is a reminder that power is transcient.