The attention of the De-Renaissance Patriots Foundation has been drawn to a rejoinder authored by the esteemed Dr. Muiz Banire, SAN, titled “In Defence of Akande, Osoba, and My Role as Advocate in the Lagos Assembly Case.” In his publication, Dr. Banire made several assertions, notably implying that the elders of the De-Renaissance Patriots Foundation lacked awareness of the background circumstances that led to the forced resignation of Hon. Meranda.
Furthermore, he sought to justify the intervention of Chief Bisi Akande and Aremo Olusegun Osoba, both of whom, according to him, were invited by Lagos political stakeholders to broker peace in the ongoing crisis within the Lagos State House of Assembly. Dr. Banire also absolved the two elder statesmen of any involvement in the alleged marginalization of indigenous Lagosians.
Additionally, Dr. Banire asserted that the leadership of the Governance Advisory Council (GAC) and the ruling party in Lagos State facilitated the invitation of Chief Akande and Aremo Osoba. He clarified that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had no involvement in their invitation or subsequent engagement in resolving the Assembly crisis. According to him, “I know for a fact that the President did not procure the duo for the purpose of resolving the crisis but that they were invited by the leadership of the ruling party, and all that eventually transpired was for the elders to seek the President’s intervention.”
Our position on Dr. Banire’s assertions
While we acknowledge and commend Dr. Muiz Banire, SAN, for his willingness to weigh in on the recent developments in the Lagos State House of Assembly, we must, however, respectfully correct certain misrepresentations in his submission.
- On the role of Akande and Osoba
Dr. Banire asserted that Chief Akande and Aremo Osoba were not “busybodies” but were rather invited by Lagos political stakeholders within the ineffectual GAC. However, we must emphasize that their intervention ultimately undermined the democratic aspirations of the indigenous people of Lagos State. The decision to reinstate Speaker Mudashiru Obasa at the expense of Hon. Meranda, an indigene, effectively disregarded the will of Lagosians from Epe, Badagry, Ikeja, Lagos, and Ikorodu divisions, who had overwhelmingly supported Meranda. The intervention of these external figures, therefore, dashed the hopes of Lagos indigenes and will be remembered in history as a betrayal of democratic principles.
- On the alleged protection of Lagos indigenes’ interests
Dr. Banire suggested that Chief Akande and Aremo Osoba protected the interests of Lagos indigenes by facilitating a resolution where Obasa was reinstated as Speaker while Hon. Meranda was compelled to resign. However, we find this assertion contradictory. The forced resignation of an indigenous representative, despite the overwhelming support she received, cannot be framed as an act of protection.
- On the composition of the GAC
Dr. Banire further claimed that 80% of the members of the GAC are indigenous Lagosians. While we refrain from debating the accuracy of this statistic, it remains evident that within the GAC, the voices of non-indigenes hold greater influence, leaving indigenous members as a subdued minority. The reality remains that, despite their numerical presence, indigenous voices struggle for true representation and influence within the ruling political structure.
- On the Lagos Central Mosque analogy
Dr. Banire attempted to draw a parallel between the Lagos Central Mosque issue and the forced resignation of Hon. Meranda. However, with due respect, this analogy is misplaced and inappropriate. Religious institutions operate under different principles from democratic governance, which is rooted in the rule of law, fairness, and popular representation. The mention of the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs and the Sultan of Sokoto in relation to this matter appears to trivialize the legitimate struggle for the political inclusion of Lagos indigenes.
- On Dr. Banire’s role in the struggle
Dr. Banire urged Lagos indigenes to adopt a more proactive approach in the fight for political inclusion. However, we believe that as a respected legal luminary and a notable Lagosian, he must lead by example. His recent stance, which appears defensive of external influences, does not unequivocally align with the struggle for equity, justice, and representation for Lagos indigenes. We expected him, as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), to have engaged with the legitimacy of the impeachment, reinstatement, and plenary election of the Lagos Assembly leadership with greater neutrality and detachment.
The way forward
The ongoing crisis within the Lagos State House of Assembly is a struggle for power tainted by betrayal and political manipulation. The most honorable course of action for Speaker Mudashiru Obasa is to step down in the interest of democracy and the rule of law. Having lost his grip on the Assembly, his continued leadership, enforced by external political forces, constitutes a threat to democratic integrity.
It is worth noting that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu himself was elected through popular votes. Therefore, it is deeply concerning that Speaker Obasa, despite losing the confidence of the House, is being artificially sustained by external forces, thereby subverting democratic principles.
Conclusion
The De-Renaissance Patriots Foundation remains convinced that the only path to accountable and effective lawmaking in Lagos State is through a House of Assembly that truly reflects the will of the people. We, therefore, call on Dr. Muiz Banire, SAN, to realign with the struggle for the political emancipation of Lagos indigenes, as he once did during the era of Chief Gani Fawehinmi. This is a defining moment, and history will remember those who stood for justice and fairness.
