An Abuja High Court
yesterday refused to
grant the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) a prayer seeking to stop the National Assembly (NASS), from taking action on the proposed Trade Union Ame-ndment Bill 2004, saying that the prayer is premature.
Delivering a brief ruling in an exparte application filed by Mr. Femi Falana, counsel to the NLC, the court however granted the NLC leave to enforce its funda-mental right on the freedom of association.
But the court refused a prayer that granting of the leave should be a bar on further action on the Bill by the National Assembly.
Justice Hussein Baba Yusuf who is the vacation judge at the FCT high court, said that the prayer if granted, would amount to the judiciary arrogating itself the power to teleguide the Natio-nal Assembly.
He said that section 4(8) of the 1999 constitution proh-ibits the NASS from enacting any law that will disturb the functions of the court.
He said that even though the court, by virtue of section 6(6) of the 1999 constitution, was given wider powers, such intentions of the sect-ion must not intervene or interfere in the affairs of the court.
Justice Baba Yusuf however said the power of the court comes to effect after the NASS has enacted the law and not before it.
“It is not proper to inte-rfere in the affairs of the NASS. Doing this would be against the principles of separation of powers.”
He said, “I am of the opinion that to interfere in the affairs of NASS at this stage of Bill is premature. The court can only look into the Bill after it has been passed as an Act. This is where the court would begin.”
The NLC had filed the suit and prayed the court to grant leave for the enforc-ement of their fundamental human right and for the leave to operate as a bar to further action on the Bill by the NASS.
Labour had asked the court for a declaration that Nigerian workers are entitled to associate and assemble peacefully without interference from the respondents as provided by section 40 of the constitution.
Also, the plaintiffs sou-ght a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents whether by themselves, their agents, privies, servants and successors in office from passing the Trade Union Amendment Bill, 2004, in any manner whatsoever. Further hearing continues on September 3.
|
|
