Benue and Zamfara Assemblies Reject Reps’ Summons, Cite Constitutional Overreach

In a bold assertion of constitutional autonomy, the Houses of Assembly of Benue and Zamfara States have rejected summons issued by the House of Representatives Committee on Public Petitions, describing the move as unconstitutional and an overextension of federal legislative authority.

The summons, issued last Friday, called on Governors Hyacinth Alia of Benue and Dauda Lawal of Zamfara, alongside their respective House Speakers and leadership, to appear before the federal legislative committee on March 8, 2025. The purpose of the summons was to address concerns regarding the states’ legislative operations and to justify why the National Assembly should not take over their legislative functions.

However, both state assemblies have roundly dismissed the move as lacking legal merit, triggering a fresh round of constitutional debate on the limits of federal oversight in Nigeria’s federal system.

Okowa Debunks ₦500 Billion Refund Rumours Amid EFCC Probe

Reps’ Summons Sparks Legal and Political Pushback from States

On Tuesday, the Benue State House of Assembly passed a formal resolution directing its Speaker, Hyacinth Dajoh, to ignore the invitation. The resolution argued that the action of the House of Representatives Committee violates provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Leading the debate, Majority Leader Saater Tiseer declared that the National Assembly has no constitutional authority to summon a state legislature. “Going by the Constitution, the Benue State House of Assembly is not answerable to the National Assembly,” Tiseer said, referencing Section 101 which grants state legislatures the power to regulate their internal procedures independently.

Other lawmakers echoed similar sentiments. Bemdoo Ipusu, one of the vocal critics of the summons, called for legal redress and accused the group behind the original petition, Guardians of Democracy, of manipulating federal legislators. “By implication, the National Assembly is attempting to usurp the functions of a vibrant and duly elected state legislature,” Ipusu said.

Lawmakers also raised concerns about misrepresentation. Peter Uche expressed surprise at being named among suspended members despite actively fulfilling his duties, arguing this demonstrated the federal lawmakers were misinformed.

Benue’s response did not end with legislative debate. In a decisive legal move, the House filed a lawsuit at the Federal High Court, Makurdi Division, seeking to restrain the National Assembly from interfering with its constitutional duties.

The case, registered as Suit No. FHC/MKD/CS/45/2025, lists as defendants Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas, Committee Chair Michael Etaba, the House of Representatives, and members of the Guardians of Democracy including Emmanuel Onwudiwe. The Benue Assembly is asking the court to declare that the National Assembly cannot take over its functions unless the Assembly is demonstrably incapacitated, as stated under Section 11(4) of the Constitution.

The lawmakers further contend that internal legislative matters, such as disciplinary measures, do not constitute grounds for federal intervention, and that Petition No. 638 of 2025 amounts to unconstitutional interference.

In Zamfara, while the tone was more diplomatic, the response was no less firm. Chairman of the Zamfara House Committee on Information, Kabiru Dangulbi, dismissed the federal summons as lacking constitutional authority. “Governor Dauda Lawal is a law-abiding citizen… He will not waste his time on issues that lack legal standing,” Dangulbi said in an interview with The Punch.

Unlike Benue, however, Zamfara indicated that it would not be pursuing legal action. Dangulbi expressed hope that the National Assembly would realize the error of its approach and drop the idea altogether.

This rejection from both state legislatures brings renewed attention to Nigeria’s ongoing struggle to balance power between different arms and tiers of government. The development may also set a precedent on how state assemblies respond to future federal oversight attempts, especially in politically sensitive periods.

As the court prepares to hear Benue’s case on May 14, political observers are closely watching whether the judiciary will reinforce the independence of state assemblies or validate a broader interpretation of federal oversight under the constitution.

For now, the rejection of the summons by both Benue and Zamfara legislatures sends a clear message: state assemblies will not concede their constitutionally protected autonomy without resistance.