RIGHT OF REPLY

REBUTTAL TO DR. TONYE CLINTON JAJA’S OPEN LETTER: A MISGUIDED, MISINFORMED, AND MISCHIEVOUS INTERPRETATION OF A JUDGMENT

The attention of discerning legal minds has been drawn to an open letter authored by one Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja, dated the 5th of July, 2025, addressed to His Excellency, the President of the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the 109 Distinguished Senators. In the said letter, the author, with much pompous verbosity and misplaced legal confidence, calls on the President of the Senate to “voluntarily step aside temporarily” based on a flawed interpretation of the recent judgment delivered by Hon. Justice Binta Nyako on July 4, 2025, in the case instituted by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Let it be firmly stated from the outset that Dr. Jaja’s letter is riddled with legal inaccuracies, deliberate distortions, and a fundamental misunderstanding of judicial pronouncements and constitutional law. The letter is not only presumptuous but also an exercise in mischief, seeking to sensationalize a ruling that did not, in substance or spirit, indict the President of the Senate nor render the judgment unfavourable to the leadership or integrity of the Senate.

1. THE ALLEGED “VIOLATION” OF SECTION 63: A RED HERRING

Dr. Jaja’s attempt to weaponize Section 63 of the Constitution, which prescribes the minimum number of days a legislator must attend sittings (181 days) – is both laughable and legally hollow. The said section is directory, not mandatory in nature, and is designed to promote participation, not to preclude disciplinary procedures within the legislature.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension was an internal disciplinary measure taken by the Senate in line with its constitutional powers under Section 60 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which empowers each House to regulate its own procedure. The invocation of Section 63 by the court in the judgment was an obiter dictum — a judicial aside, not a binding or operative part of the court’s ratio decidendi. In plain legal language, it was a passing comment, not a declaration of unconstitutionality or wrongdoing on the part of the Senate President.

2. THE ALLEGATION THAT THE JUDGMENT WAS UNFAVOURABLE TO THE SENATE PRESIDENT IS ABSURD

Contrary to the tone and tenor of Dr. Jaja’s letter, Hon. Justice Nyako did not issue any finding or order against the Senate President personally. The judgment did not direct him to resign, step aside, or face any sanction. Rather, the decision centered around the procedural validity of the suspension of a member of the Senate and made certain declarations regarding the rights of constituents to representation.

Even the references to the Standing Orders of the Senate were suggestions made in light of aligning internal rules with constitutional standards, not a condemnation of the Senate President’s conduct. At no time did the Court declare that the Standing Orders were illegal, void, or unconstitutional. They were simply held to be in need of review where they conflict with express constitutional provisions, a normal jurisprudential outcome in a constitutional democracy.

3. THE REFERENCE TO THE CASE OF ALEGEBE v. OLOYO IS MISPLACED

The Alegebe v. Oloyo decision (1983) is irrelevant in the context of the present matter. That case dealt with the legality of removal from legislative office, and the procedures for leadership change within a State House of Assembly. It bears no nexus, in fact or law, with the internal disciplinary action of suspending a member of the National Assembly for breach of Senate decorum and ethics. More importantly, in Alegbe, the issues were live, central, and pleaded, not speculative, as Dr. Jaja attempts to do in his pseudo-legal analysis.

4. CALL FOR PRO TEMPORE PRESIDENT IS BASELESS AND OFFENSIVE

The recommendation that the Senate President should step aside and allow for a Pro Tempore President to take over based on a judgment that did not indict him personally or institutionally is a reckless call devoid of legal merit or democratic logic. The Constitution of Nigeria does not recognize whimsical substitution of duly elected presiding officers based on non-existent judicial sanctions.

Therefore, any call for his temporary stepping down is not only legally unsound but a deliberate attempt at political mischief, targeted character assassination, and an abuse of academic privilege.

5. SENATE STANDS VINDICATED IN PROCEDURE, YET OPEN TO CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT

It is important to underscore that the judgment did not nullify the constitutional authority of the Senate to discipline its members. Rather, the court emphasized the need for such disciplinary measures to comply with broader constitutional provisions relating to representation and fair hearing.

The Senate, under the leadership of its President, remains committed to upholding constitutional democracy and the rule of law. Where improvements or harmonization of internal procedures with constitutional mandates are necessary, the Senate has both the competence and maturity to undertake such revisions without being goaded by ill-conceived and alarmist open letters.

CONCLUSION

Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja’s open letter is nothing more than an ill-informed tirade, laced with speculative interpretations and driven by a motive that appears more political than legal. It is unfortunate that a supposed legal mind would seek to stir public sentiment and mislead the Nigerian populace by distorting the content and import of a court judgment.

The Senate President remains firmly in office, unshaken by such pedestrian calls, and continues to discharge his duties in accordance with the Constitution and in service of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

This rebuttal is to place the records straight and expose the hollowness of Dr. Jaja’s so-called open letter. It deserves no further attention.

Signed:
Dr. M. O. Ubani SAN
Legal Adviser to the Office of the Senate President.
5th July 2025

____________________________________________________________________

(C) CITY LAWYER Magazine. All rights reserved. To join our Channel, click here. Click here to join our WhatsApp chatroom. Contact us at citylawyermag@gmail.com or 081-3838-0083.