DSS Raids Lagos Assembly, Seals Speaker, Deputy's Offices

Reported by Ilesanmi Ifeoluwa D

In the early hours of Monday, officers from the Department of State Security (DSS) and the Nigeria Police raided the Lagos State House of Assembly. They sealed off the offices of the Speaker, Mojisola Meranda, her deputy, and the clerk of the house.

As of 10 am, armed security personnel have taken over the premises at Alausa, Ikeja, and the environs, frisking every passerby.

Meranda, however, arrived with her convoy at approximately 11:15 AM.

Former Speaker of the House, Mudashiru Obasa, has sued state lawmakers, challenging his removal from the Assembly.

Obasa has filed a motion at the Ikeja Division of the State High Court, seeking an accelerated hearing of his suit.

Obasa was removed in absentia by 32 of the 40 members of the state assembly on January 13, 2025, while he was in America. This situation was described as a "coup" orchestrated by President Bola Tinubu.

The development has sparked controversy among members of the Governance Advisory Council (GAC), the apex political decision-making body in the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Lagos, as they remain divided over Obasa's potential removal.

Obasa, in the lawsuit, was contesting the legality of his removal from office.

According to Vanguard, the motion was filed on Wednesday, February 12, 2025, naming the Lagos State House of Assembly and Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, the current Speaker of the House, as defendants.

In the lawsuit filed by his lawyers, led by Chief Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, Obasa is seeking several reliefs, including an order to fix a date for the swift hearing of the originating summons.

An order of this Honourable Court abridging the time within which the defendants may file their response by way of counter-affidavits/written addresses as specified by the Rules of this Honourable Court to 7 days after the hearing and determination of this application.

“An order of this Honourable Court abridging the time within which the Plaintiff/Applicant may file its reply of points law, as specified in the Rules of this Honourable Court, to 3 days of the service of the Defendants processes on him.”

Obasa’s application is based on nine grounds, including interpretation of various sections of the Constitution of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and the Rules of the Lagos State House of Assembly.

The suit read in part: “This application is predicated among which he stated the suit concerns the interpretation of Sections 36; 90; 92(2)(c); 101; and 311 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) vis-à-vis ORDER V RULE 18(2) and Order II Rule 9(1)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii)(viii) OF RULES AND STANDING ORDER OF LAGOS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (which enjoy constitutional flavor and status). The action borders on the constitutionality or otherwise of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly of the 13th January 2025, where the Plaintiff herein, as Honourable Speaker, was said to be impeached.

“This action challenges the constitutionality of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly to sit during recess without the Speaker reconvening the House or giving any other person powers to reconvene the House.

Public interest requires the case to be heard and determined speedily and expeditiously so that legislative activities in the state are not stalled.

“The legality of the continued sitting of the 1st defendant under the present leadership in violation of the aforementioned laws and rules calls for an urgent determination;

The nature of this action is such that is required to be heard and determined expeditiously, having regard to the exceptional circumstances surrounding same;

“There is need to abridge the time within which the Defendants may file their response to the originating summon as well as time within which the claimant/Applicant may file its reply on point of law, and this Honorable Court is imbued with inherent powers to grant accelerated hearing and abridgment of time; and

"It is expedient to grant accelerated hearing of this action and abridgment of time for parties to file the relevant processes in the interest of justice.”

Obasa asserted that neither party in the case would be harmed or experience any injustice by granting his application.