By  Ikechukwu Nnochiri
In a bid to retain their seats, 37 lawmakers whose seats are currently under threat at the House of Representatives, yesterday, filed a motion seeking to stay the execution of the Abuja Federal High Court judgment that asked them to vacate their offices.

It will be be recalled that Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the High Court, in his judgment, urged the lawmakers to honourably resign from office, having defected to the All Progressive Congress, APC, even though they were elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.

Justice Ademola further held that by virtue of their defection, the lawmakers, stripped themselves of the powers to vote or contribute to motions before the House of Representatives.

It was the decision of the court that in line with the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigerian, as amended, the defected lawmakers, even if in the majority, cannot effect change in the current leadership of the House. Specifically, the high court, said they have no moral or legal ground to remain in the House of Reps, stressing that they were only holding a mandate that was bequeathed to them by the PDP, in trust.

Meanwhile, the lawmakers, in an appeal endorsed by eighteen of them, yesterday, sought for a stay of execution of the judgment, pending the resolution of all the legal issues.

Those that applied for suspension of the judgment yesterday were Hon. Abdullahi Balarabe; Abdulmumin Jibrin; Abdulahi Wamako; Aliyu Patigi; Ahmed Zerewa; Aishatu Ahmed; Aiyedun Olayinka; Alhassan Garba; Aliyu Mandaki; Aliyu Shehu and Aminu Shagari.

Others were Aminu Suleiman; Aminua Tukur; Andrew Uchendu; Asita Honourable; Bashir Babale; Blessing Usiegbe and Dakuku Peterside.

In their six grounds of appeal, the appellants, contended that the trial judge, erred in law when in spite of the objection and clear lack of jurisdiction of the court over the subject matter of the suit, assumed jurisdiction and determined the matter on its merits.

Besides, they argued that the trial judge erred in law and lacked jurisdiction when he ordered the appellants to vacate their seats as members of the House. Accusing the Judge of exhibiting biased tendencies while the matter lasted, the appellants, insisted that Justice Adeniyi, sacrificed objectivity and  breached their fundamental rights to fair hearing.

More so, the embattled lawmakers, are seeking for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Clerk, from preventing or interfering in any way with their rights to participate in any of the official, plenary or other business of the House of Representatives.

The motion for stay filed by their counsel, Mr. Sabastine Hon, SAN, disclosed that already, the House of Representatives has started making moves to compel the lawmakers to vacate their seats as members of the House of Representatives.

In a 22 paragraphs affidavit in support of the motion, the applicants, averred that they were elected by their constituents to represent them in the House of Representatives on a term of four years respectively which is still running.

They maintained that if they cease to so represent their constituents, there will be no representation of the interest of those constituents in the House.

“That the process of further amending the1999 constitution is in progress; and if not restrained, the respondents may hinder the appellants from participating in the process”, they added.

They further averred that the amendment of the constitution requires 2/3 majority; and if they are not permitted to participate in the process, the requisite 2/3 majority may not be attained.