Tambuwal said the implication of the withdrawal is that the acting IG has removed him as the Speaker of the House of Reps, an action that he said is far out of his official powers of the IGP.
In a statement by his Special Adviser, Media and Public Affairs, Malam Imam Imam, the Speaker said the action of the Acting IGP contravened the 1999 constitution.
He warned the IG to desist from assuming or usurping the constitutional functions of the Judiciary.
Below is the official statement from Speaker Tambuwal:
"The office of the Hon Speaker House of Representatives, Rt Hon Aminu Waziri Tambuwal has received with shock and amazement the statement issued by the Nigerian Police Force Headquarters justifying the withdrawal of Police Security Personnel attached to the Hon Speaker, by the Acting Inspector General of Police.
“In the said statement, the Force has stated to the effect that by his defection from the PDP to the APC, the Hon Speaker is in breach of Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution and is consequently no longer entitled to police security. Nothing can be further from the truth.
“The implication of the Inspector General of Police’s statement is that as sanction for this alleged constitutional breach, he has removed Rt Hon Aminu Waziri Tambuwal from office of Speaker House of Representatives.
“For the avoidance of doubt the question of whether or not there is a division or faction in the PDP has been resolved by Lord Justice Faji of the Ilorin Division of Federal High Court in suit FHC/IL/CS/6/2014 in which the court held that indeed there were factions in the PDP.
“Again in suit no FHC/S/CS/ 4/2014, the Sokoto Division of the Federal High Court per Justice Aikawa, the judgment of the court was that there was not only Division but faction in the PDP which later merged with the APC.
“As the number four citizen in the hierarchy of protocol in the country, the Speaker is entitled to security protection by the security agencies.
"Therefore, we see the action of the Acting Inspector General of Police as not only contempt of the courts but a ploy to bring harm to the person of Rt Hon Aminu Waziri Tambuwal.
“In the said statement, the Force has stated to the effect that by his defection from the PDP to the APC, the Hon Speaker is in breach of Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution and is consequently no longer entitled to police security. Nothing can be further from the truth.
“The implication of the Inspector General of Police’s statement is that as sanction for this alleged constitutional breach, he has removed Rt Hon Aminu Waziri Tambuwal from office of Speaker House of Representatives.
“For the avoidance of doubt the question of whether or not there is a division or faction in the PDP has been resolved by Lord Justice Faji of the Ilorin Division of Federal High Court in suit FHC/IL/CS/6/2014 in which the court held that indeed there were factions in the PDP.
“Again in suit no FHC/S/CS/ 4/2014, the Sokoto Division of the Federal High Court per Justice Aikawa, the judgment of the court was that there was not only Division but faction in the PDP which later merged with the APC.
“As the number four citizen in the hierarchy of protocol in the country, the Speaker is entitled to security protection by the security agencies.
"Therefore, we see the action of the Acting Inspector General of Police as not only contempt of the courts but a ploy to bring harm to the person of Rt Hon Aminu Waziri Tambuwal.
“We are on authority that nothing in the 1999 Constitution nor the Police Act confers on the police force adjudicatory powers, including the interpretation of the constitution.
“In any case, even Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution does not contemplate the issuing of or compliance with unlawful orders by the President and or the the Inspector General of Police respectively.
“What the Acting Inspector General of Police has done therefore has no basis in law, including the 1999 Constitution, which he has cited. It is a brazen act of crass impunity, gross Constitutional breach and contempt of court. The Inspector General should desist from assuming or usurping the constitutional functions of the Judiciary.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the Speaker of the House is elected by members from among themselves under Section 50(1) (b) of the constitution and vacates office under Section 50 (2) (a) (b) &(c), in the case of (c) by two-thirds majority of members of the House.
“The Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution which refers to a member vacating his seat on grounds of defection, which the Inspector General of Police refers to,has a proviso which has been and still is a matter for judicial and not police interpretation.
“We have faith and confidence in our judiciary and are persuaded that it cannot be stampeded into administering injustice”.
“In any case, even Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution does not contemplate the issuing of or compliance with unlawful orders by the President and or the the Inspector General of Police respectively.
“What the Acting Inspector General of Police has done therefore has no basis in law, including the 1999 Constitution, which he has cited. It is a brazen act of crass impunity, gross Constitutional breach and contempt of court. The Inspector General should desist from assuming or usurping the constitutional functions of the Judiciary.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the Speaker of the House is elected by members from among themselves under Section 50(1) (b) of the constitution and vacates office under Section 50 (2) (a) (b) &(c), in the case of (c) by two-thirds majority of members of the House.
“The Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution which refers to a member vacating his seat on grounds of defection, which the Inspector General of Police refers to,has a proviso which has been and still is a matter for judicial and not police interpretation.
“We have faith and confidence in our judiciary and are persuaded that it cannot be stampeded into administering injustice”.
