As the year begins, many have wished for a prosperous start, including Honourable Mudashiru Obasa. However, recent events at the Lagos State House of Assembly suggest that Obasa’s aspirations may have taken an unexpected turn. Until January 12, 2025, Obasa held the position of Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly. By the following day, January 13, he had been removed, becoming a former Speaker in what many have described as a legislative coup.
This is not the first time such an event has occurred in the Lagos Assembly. In the past, we witnessed the removal of Hon. Jokotola Pelumi as Speaker under unclear allegations. At the time, the House operated under financial constraints, making misappropriation unlikely. Similarly, Hon. Funmi Tejuoso was removed as Deputy Speaker over an issue unrelated to her and during her absence from the country. In both cases, internal ambition and the desire for control were significant factors.
The recent removal of Mudashiru Obasa has been linked to allegations of high-handedness, fraud, and gross misconduct. While Obasa has not publicly refuted these claims, a faceless human rights group has condemned the removal, citing a breach of fair hearing and vowing to challenge it. However, Obasa’s past actions reveal that he played an active role in the removal of other principal officers, often employing similar tactics. Offices were locked, and individuals were barred from the Assembly premises. The proverb “whoever lives by the sword must die by the sword” aptly describes this situation.
The Question of Fair Hearing
A key issue raised by critics is whether Obasa was given an opportunity to defend himself. While the principle of fair hearing is a cornerstone of natural justice, it is essential to consider whether reasons are even required for the removal of a Speaker. Eligibility for the position is primarily determined by election into the House, and members can collectively decide to remove a Speaker without providing reasons. However, when allegations, particularly criminal ones, are made, the principle of fair hearing must be upheld.
In this case, there is no evidence that the removal was tied to specific allegations. The Hansard of the House would provide a more accurate record than public statements by individual members. If no formal accusations were made, the claims of a lack of fair hearing may be unfounded.
Lessons for Obasa and Others
Obasa must now return to his role as a legislator, representing his constituents, as he was originally elected to do. This situation serves as a reminder that what goes around comes around. Principal officers must remember that they are first among equals, with no extraordinary powers. Voluntary resignation, as seen in some jurisdictions, is often a more honorable response when a leader feels they are no longer meeting expectations.
The opaque conduct of many principal officers often leads to their downfall. Mutual respect between the organs of state is essential for stability. Reports suggest that Obasa’s strained relationship with the state’s executive, particularly over local government bills, contributed to his removal. Interestingly, members who once hailed Obasa as a god-like figure have now turned against him, highlighting the fickle nature of political alliances.
While the House members have the right to make decisions, these must be exercised responsibly. Instead of alluding to dubious reasons, a straightforward statement such as “we no longer find you worthy to lead us” would have sufficed. Obasa must also reflect on his past actions, recognizing that he was part of the system that deprived others of opportunities. As the Yoruba saying goes, a se sile le, ni abo wa ba—what goes around comes around.
For updates on this and other stories, join our WhatsApp channel here: Chronicles Reporters.