Impeachment of public office holders has become a recurring decimal in Nigeria's
Political landscape since her return to democratic rule in 1999, after many years of
military rule. The impeachment saga took its debilitating tool across the States of the
Federation between 2003 till date.
Impeachment thrives in a democratic government; and it is the most effective
constitutional instrument put in place to check the excesses of public office holders. This
is to prevent abuse of public office by unscrupulous public office holders which would
result in plundering of the public coffer.
The effect of impeachment process is still being felt by the victims across the States of
the Federation which cut across the Executive, Legislative and Judicial officers of both
Federal and States. The rational for the incessant, unrestrained and unabated resort to
impeachment proceedings to remove public officer in total disregard to impeachment
procedure as entrenched in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, does
not accord with democratic principles. Nigeria practices constitutional democracy.
Therefore, the Constitution should be our guide in governance. The dreaded word
“impeachment” is fast becoming a norm in our society, looming large like a hydra-
headed monster ready to devour and destroy our hard earned democracy, if unchecked.
1.1 Definition of Impeachment
Impeachment is a formal process in which an elected official is accused of unlawful
activity and which may or may not lead to the removal of that official from office1. It is
only a legal statement of charges parallel to an indictment in criminal law. An official
who is impeached faces a second legislative vote, which determines conviction or failure
to convict on the charges embodied by the impeachment. Most constitution requires a
super majority to convict. Although the subject of the charges is criminal action, it does
not constitute a criminal trial, the only question under consideration is the removal of
individual from office, and the possibility of a subsequent vote preventing the removed
official from ever again holding political office in the jurisdiction where he was
removed.2
The Encyclopedia Americana3
states that, Impeachment is a proceeding in which
accusations are brought by a legislative branch of a government against civil official
(Chief of State, Cabinet members and Judges). Legally, impeachment could also be
defined as the process whereby public officers are charged and tried for misconduct or
acts amounting to misconduct of such a public officer culminating to his removal from
office, normally after a two-third majority of the National Assembly or State Houses of
Assembly, as the case may be consents to the removal of such officer.
Impeachment is also defined as the Act of accusing a public official or political office
holder of committing a serious crime.4 For example, a written accusation by the House of
Representatives or Senate against the President or Vice-President., House of Assembly
against Governor or Deputy Governor or any relevant public officials of the State?s
government or Federal Government of Nigeria, that he is guilty of gross misconduct. In
this respect, impeachment process could be associated with the concept of checks and
balances inherent in the doctrine of separation of powers in the three divisions of
government, executive, legislature and the judiciary which also is entrenched in sections
4,5 and 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
Black?s Law Dictionary defines impeachment as:
A criminal proceeding against a public officer, before a quasi-
political court, instituted by a written accusation called articles of
impeachment; for example a written accusation of the House of
Representatives of the United State to the Senate of the United
State against the President, Vice President, or an officer of the
United State, including Federal Judges.5
Impeachment therefore is an indictment of a public office holder that he is guilty of an
impeachable offence such as a breach of the Constitution or any other crime which in the
opinion of the legislature is gross misconduct. The indictment of such officer ignites the
process of his impeachment and subsequent removal from office on conviction. However,
to ground conviction, the constitutional requirement for impeachment must be followed
else, the Court will intervene and invalidate the proceedings leading to such impeachment. In Nigeria, the procedure to impeach the President, Vice President,
Governor and the Deputy Governor is found in sections 143 and 188 of the Constitution
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). To successfully impeach these
officers, the criteria set out in sections 143 and 188 of the constitution must be complied
with. In Inakoju v Adeleke, the Court of Appeal per Ogebe JCA (as he then was) stated
thus:
For all I have said in this judgment I have no hesitation in holding that
the learned trial judge was wrong in declining jurisdiction. Indeed he
had jurisdiction to examine the claim in the light of section 188
subsections 1-9 of the 1999 Constitution and if he was not satisfied
that the impeachment proceedings were instituted in compliance
therefore, he has jurisdiction to intervene to ensure compliance. If on
the other hand there was compliance with the pre-impeachment
process that what happened thereafter was the internal affair of the
House of Assembly and he would not have jurisdiction to intervene.6
Impeachment therefore, is a process that is used to charge, try, and remove public
officials for misconduct while in office. The word impeachment should therefore not be
used as a substitute to the removal provisions of section 188. The procedure in section
188 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) is one for
the removal of Governor or Deputy Governor and not of impeachment. Impeachment
does not necessarily result in removal from office. For example, President Andrew
Johnson of the United States of America was impeached in 1868 after violating the
Tenure of Office Act, but was not removed from office. He was acquitted by the Senate,
