Sen. Godswill Akpabio, the president of the Senate reacted to Mr Femi Falana, counsel to the suspended senator from Bauchi Central, Abdul Ningi, in a letter on Thursday, telling him to follow his guidance in whatever action he plans to take.
Falani sent a letter on behalf of Ningi, whose charges of budget padding split the Senate, to Akpabio more than a week after Ningi was suspended, threatening legal action if his suspension was not lifted.
Following an assessment of his allegations, which the senators claimed were unfounded and painted in a negative light, the senator was suspended for three months.
When Ningi was suspended, Akpabio presided over a protracted plenary and was clearly irritated. Nevertheless, he gave each senator an opportunity to speak during the boisterous discussion period.
Although the letter, dated 27 March, expressed dissatisfaction with Akpabio’s suspension of Ningi and said it was “illegal,” further giving him seven days to end the suspension or face legal action from the Federal High Court demanding his restoration.
On Thursday, however, Akpabio stated that the Senate as a whole made the decision to suspend him, not him.
READ ALSO: Bakassi Deep Seaport is a must for Cross River – Works Commissioner
“We have carefully read through your analysis of the facts and circumstances leading to your client’s suspension from the senate.
“We are unable to find reason in your verdict of our client’s sole culpability in the said suspension,” Akpabio’s counsel said.
He added, “We therefore plead non est factum for our client.
“In addition to the above and contrary to the contents of your letter under reference, our client was at no time your client’s accuser, prosecutor and judge,” the letter read.
Akpabio’s counsel in the letter stressed that “Our client’s role at the session of the senate that led to your client’s suspension was and remains the statutory role of a legislative house presiding officer, which role equally includes pronouncing the majority decision of the legislative house at the end of debate and voting.
“Permit us to mention your attempt at drawing our client’s attention to legal authorities and pronouncements of our courts of record on the unconstitutionality of suspending members of legislative houses, which attempt we dare say was unhelpful, due to your failure or refusal to make available the relevant particulars of the said court decisions in your letter.”
In reference, the letter added, “You may wish to provide these legal authorities which you have alluded to, bearing in mind that every decision of a court emanates from its peculiar facts, circumstances and extant laws. In as much as it may not be necessary to canvass herein all the remedies available to our client, in response to your threats of court action and petition to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC).
“It is important we mention that legislative proceedings are guided by rules.
“We urge you to give due consideration to the legal issues raised in this letter and be guided accordingly in your further and future action in respect of this matter,” he added in the letter.
