On January 13, 2025, the Lagos State House of Assembly, dominated by members of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), moved to remove Rt. Hon. Mudashiru Ajayi Obasa from his position as Speaker. Obasa had been Speaker since 2015 — one of the longest-serving in the Assembly’s history — and was representing Agege Constituency I. 
Obasa’s removal took place during a plenary session while he was out of the country, reportedly returning from the United States, which immediately raised political and procedural questions about the legitimacy of the process. Obasa’s colleagues accused him of gross misconduct, financial mismanagement, abuse of office, high-handed leadership and other disciplinary breaches. 
In that same session:
• At least 32 to 36 of the 40 lawmakers supported his removal. 
• The Deputy Speaker, Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, was elected as the new Speaker, making her the first female Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly. 
• The Clerk of the Assembly was suspended, and several other leadership changes were made. 
The removal was framed by supporters as necessary for good governance, while detractors decried it as a political coup — especially given that a “fake mace” was alleged to have been used and police were said to have been deployed to enforce the session’s proceedings. Obasa claimed that the Assembly chamber was broken into, and security forces were used to intimidate his loyalists. 
2. POLITICAL BASIS AND UNDERPINNINGS.
Internal Party Dynamics;
Although Obasa’s removal was premised by lawmakers on claims of misconduct, many observers saw it as rooted in internal APC politics:
• Obasa had been a powerful figure with nearly a decade in leadership, and there were rumors about his gubernatorial ambitions for 2027, which unsettled some in the party leadership. 
• Tensions reportedly grew between Obasa and key APC figures, including state and possibly national leaders, over succession planning and cohesion within the party. 
Assembly Majority Rule vs. Due Process;
The majority of lawmakers maintained that, as elected representatives, they had the constitutional right to remove their Speaker. They insisted the decision was lawful and in line with Sections of the 1999 Constitution governing the election and removal of principal officers. 
However, Obasa’s camp argued that proper procedural requirements were ignored, including the absence of the Speaker’s consent to convene the session and irregularities in the invocation of Assembly rules.
3. IMMEDIATE EFFECT.
The removal triggered:
• Political instability in the Lagos legislature, resulting in a divided Assembly with competing claims to legitimate authority. 
• Negative public and media attention, as Lagos is Nigeria’s most populous and economically significant state.
• Heightened intraparty tensions within APC, prompting interventions from party elders and broader stakeholders to manage the fallout and preserve unity.
The reinstatement crisis also overshadowed the Assembly’s legislative agenda for the first quarter of the year and raised questions about executive–legislative relations in the state.
4. LITIGATION AND JUDICIARY INTERVENTIONS.
Obasa’s Lawsuit;
On February 12, 2025, Obasa filed a lawsuit at the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, challenging the legality of his impeachment. His legal arguments included:
• The impeachment occurred while the Assembly was on recess and without proper authority.
• The session that removed him was convened without the Speaker’s authorization, or delegation of power to relevant officers.
• The process violated both constitutional provisions and the Assembly’s standing rules. 
High Court Ruling;
On April 16, 2025, the Lagos High Court delivered a landmark judgment:
• It declared the January 13 proceedings and resolutions illegal, unconstitutional, null, and void. 
• The court held that the removal could not stand because due process was not followed, particularly noting that only House leaders could properly convene a meeting — not the Chief Whip or other members on their own. 
• The judgment awarded Obasa damages of ₦500,000 for the unlawful removal and the distress caused to him. 
• All decisions taken by the Assembly from the controversial session were voided. 
The ruling effectively nullified Meranda’s brief tenure and legally reinforced Obasa’s claim to the office of Speaker.
5. REINSTATEMENT AND POLITICAL RESOLUTION.
Return to Speakership;
Prior to the court decision, political negotiations were already underway. On March 3, 2025, Mojisola Meranda resigned as Speaker after 49 days in office, in a move widely interpreted as intended to restore harmony within the House and wider political establishment. 
Following her resignation:
• Obasa was renominated and re-elected Speaker by his colleagues in the Assembly.
• There was a reshuffling of leadership positions, with Meranda becoming Deputy Speaker and other principal officers being repositioned. 
Obasa, upon his reinstatement, expressed gratitude to colleagues and interveners for their support, urging unity and continued service to the people of Lagos.
6. BROADER SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS.
Political Precedent;
The crisis highlighted key issues in Nigerian sub-national governance:
• The importance of due process and constitutionalism in legislative leadership changes.
• The role of the judiciary as a check on political maneuvers that may circumvent established procedures.
Institutional Stability;
The intervention by senior party figures and the eventual legal and political resolution helped avert a prolonged constitutional crisis and potential legislative paralysis.
7. CONCLUSION.
The events surrounding Obasa’s removal and reinstatement in 2025 mark one of the most dramatic and instructive episodes in Lagos State’s political history. It involved rapid shifts in power, legal confrontations, and significant political negotiation — all within the broader context of party politics and constitutional governance. The episode reaffirmed that procedural correctness and judicial oversight are central to the health of democratic institutions.
Lanre Ogunyemi writes from Lagos
