The Ondo State Home of Meeting has declared that the continuing impeachment course of towards the Deputy Governor, Fortunate Aiyedatiwa, has not been suspended as earlier reported within the media.
The Chairman, Home Committee on Data, Olatunji Oshati, on Friday, advised a journalist that the Home had halted the impeachment course of after the state Chief Decide, Justice Olusegun Odusola, had communicated to it on his incapacity to represent a panel to analyze the allegation towards the deputy governor, following a court docket order.
He mentioned, “We’ve got thought of the letter (of the CJ) which is in all places within the public area and we’re halting the impeachment course of till the order of the Federal Excessive Court docket is vacated.
“It’s not about being smug with energy; it’s about holding public officers accountable. It additionally exhibits that the method of impeachment transcends the monopoly of the legislature as we will see that the judiciary has stalled it.”
Nevertheless, the Home, by its lawyer, Femi Emodamori, acknowledged once more that it had not suspended the method, saying it will pursue it to a logical conclusion.
This was contained in an announcement by the authorized practitioner on behalf
of the Meeting on Saturday.
A part of the assertion learn, “Impeachment is a constitutional course of clearly outlined in part 188 (1)-(11) of the Structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and our consumer has meticulously complied with all of the phases main as much as the duty positioned on the state Chief Decide to arrange a seven-man panel to analyze the allegations, as stipulated in Part 188(5) of the Structure.
“The Home reaffirmed that it has not ‘suspended’ the impeachment course of as inaccurately reported, and can carry identical by to a logical conclusion as a way to decide the veracity or in any other case of the monumental allegations of gross misconduct towards the deputy governor.”
It added, “His lordship nonetheless acknowledged that as a Chief Decide, he would favor that the ex parte order, which his lordship believes ‘tied his hand’, ought to first be vacated or put aside. The chief choose clearly prefers to err on the aspect of warning.”