Governor Ayodele Fayose is hoping to extend his tenure as the Governor of Ekiti state by another seven months; this is according to our source.
Fayose’s tenure is set to expire in 2018 after which another governorship election will hold. The Governor had stated that his main preoccupation after his exit will be to continue agitating for better treatments for the Nigerian populace from the federal and state governments.
However, last Friday he made an about turn when he appeared on Ekiti state’s electronic medium during the May edition of his monthly ‘Governor Explains’ programme.
Fayose said he would seek redress in the apex court over possible extension of his tenure beyond 2018 on account of his impeachment in 2006 by the state House of Assembly.
According to him he reserved the constitutional right to contest the removal since the Supreme Court had ruled that his impeachment on October 16, 2016 as illegal, null and void.
He said the pertinent question to ask the court is whether by virtue of an earlier judgment in his favour, dismissing his removal, he had no right to seek to complete his remaining tenure of seven months.
He emphasized that the case as to whether he was entitled to complete his tenure or not must first be determined before there could be another governorship election in the state next year.
An ex-member of the state’s assembly, Hon. Bamidele Faparusi, said such a dream could only exist in the wildest imagination of a “theatric like Fayose, who sees governance as a comic relief, rather than a serious business.”
“The governor should have known that he cannot be entitled to third term in office, neither can the oath of office be administered on him three times. What former Governor Nyako wanted to achieve was to finish the remaining nine months of his second term tenure before he was ousted and Supreme Court was so unequivocal that since that dispensation had lapsed, he could only be entitled to the benefits and that has become a functus officio as far as this case is concerned.
“Governor Fayose should refrain from wasting the precious time of the court by wanting to engage in mere academic exercise that has no legal fecundity, having been earlier determined by the apex court.” (Source: DAILYTRUST)