By Godwin Tsa, Abuja
On Tuesday, June 29, 2021, the political landscape of the country was shaken following the defection of Governor Bello Matawalle of Zamfara State from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Matawalle announced his defection to APC in Gusau on Tuesday at a special grand rally to receive him to the party, organised by the National Caretaker Committee of the APC led by Gov. Maimala Buni of Yobe.
Speaking at the event, Matawalle said, “As from today, I Bello Matawallen Maradun, governor of Zamfara, I am happy to announce my defection from the PDP to the APC.
“As of today, I am a full APC member and leader of APC in Zamfara.
“I am calling on all APC stakeholders in the state to join hands with me to build the party and move the state forward,” Matawalle said.
Matawalle by that decision, became the third governor from the PDP controlled state to have cross-carpeted to the ruling APC, after governor David Umahi of Ebonyi State and his Cross Rivers counterpart, Gov. Ben Ayade.
PDP kicks
His defection was not without some resistance from the PDP, a party on whose platform he rode to the Zamfara Government House.
Ahead of the scheduled defection, his political platform, PDP has warned the governor against the move, threatening to go the whole distance to defend its mandate.
The main opposition party had specifically, cautioned Matawalle to know that his plans amount to a decision to vacate office “as no law allows him to cross over to any other party with the governorship mandate statutorily given to the PDP through the ballot box, as already established by the provision of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the standing judgment of the Supreme Court.”
Addressing newsmen at the party’s secretariat, PDP spokesman, Kola Ologbondiyan said a “combined reading of Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution as the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in Faleke v. INEC (2016) is clear in holding that it is the political party that stands for election, that votes scored in election belong to the political party and that the candidate nominated to contest at an election by his party, acts only as the agent of his party.”
He noted that the provisions of the constitution is very clear in barring lawmakers from cross carpeting, except in a situation of a division in the political party upon which platform they were elected.”
Ologbondiyan went on to declare emphatically that “there is no division in the PDP to warrant the defection of any of our lawmakers.”
His emergence as Zamfara gov
On May 24, 2019, the Supreme Court delivered judgment on the intra-party dispute in the Zamfara State APC.
The apex court had, in the judgment, held among others, that the APC did not hold valid primaries preparatory to the 2019 general election, voided its (the party’s) victory in the elections and made a consequential order, directing the party with the second highest scores in the election to claim the victory.
The point must be made clear, that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is silent, on the issue of defection of a sitting governor, from the party under which he won his election to another party, unlike section 68(1g) of the Constitution which provides for the vacation of the seat by a member of the National Assembly who defects to another party before the expiration of his term.
Section 68(1) (g), of the 1999 constitution provides that: “A member of the Senate or a House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House if being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected: Provided that his membership of the latter party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored.”
Reasons for cross carpeting or defection by politicians, could be as a result of personality clash, power tussles, divergent views on the operations of a political party’s philosophy, crisis or division within a given political party, disagreement on party’s position on an issue, realisation of one’s personal political ambition and party leaders reneging on agreed issues of the political party probably on power- sharing formula.
The Nigerian constitution implicitly recognizes two kinds of party switching: (a) Opportunistic party switching aimed at conferring benefits or advantages on the switching candidate; and (b) Party switching as a result of division in the switching candidate’s political party. The first kind — opportunistic party switching — is prohibited and could lead to disqualification. The second — leaving a party following a division– is permitted by law and ordinarily does not affect the standing of the party switching legislator. The constitution recognises a division in the party as a ground for switching parties without vacating one’s seat in the legislature.
Having said that, it is pertinent to say that by the judgment of the Supreme Court, the occupant of the seat of the governor of Zamfara State, must be a Peoples Democratic Party faithful and not APC. This is because by the subsisting order of the Supreme Court, the APC did not contest election in May 2019 in Zamfara, and the candidates of the PDP, were all declared winners of the various elective posts in the state.
In his contribution to this debate, an Abuja-based legal practitioner, Nkem Okoro argued that “ A court of law can declare the office of the governor and deputy governor of any state vacant, where the occupants of such seats defect from the party, which nominated and sponsored them to contest the gubernatorial election in Nigeria and under whose platform, they won elections as candidates of the said party.
Section 221 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, provides as follows: “No association other than a political party, shall canvass for votes for any candidate at any election or contribute to the funds of any political party or the election expenses of any candidate at an election.
Okoro noted that the Supreme Court while interpreting the provisions of section 221 of the Constitution had variously held that independent candidature in election is not applicable in Nigeria, that, in reality and in keeping with section 221 of the Constitution, it is the party which sponsors a candidate in an election that wins the election since a candidate cannot contest an election without being sponsored by a party. Thus, votes are garnered on behalf of the political party in an election. See the case Faleke V INEC (2016) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1543) 61 (P. 173, paras. D-F).
It is not in dispute that Dr. Bello Mohammed Matawalle was nominated and sponsored to contest for the post of the governor of Zamfara State, in May 2019, by the PDP. This clearly means that the governor of Zamfara, cannot abandon the party that nominated him, and sponsored his election without legal consequences. The legal consequences can only be determined by a court of law, in a case properly brought before it, in accordance with the provisions of section 6(6b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, which provides for the judicial powers of the court in all matters between persons, or between government or authority and to any person in Nigeria, and to all actions and proceedings relating thereto, for the determination of any question as to civil rights and obligations of that person.
The PDP, has a right over who occupies the governorship seat in Zamfara State in view of the planned defection of the governor of Zamfara from the PDP, to the APC, and is therefore entitled to remedies properly sought before a court of law in the unlikely event that the governor defects. The latin maxim of ubi jus ibiremedium, is applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. It is to be noted that “jus” signifies the legal authority to do or demand something and “remedium” means the right of action or the means given by law for recovery or the declaration or assertion of that right. In other words, the maxim presupposes that where the law gives a right, it also gives remedy, that remedy must be founded on a legal right. See the case of Bello v. A.-G., Oyo State (1986) 1 NWLR 828; Thomas v. Olufosoye (1986) 1 NWLR (Part 18) 669.
However, in pursuing this remedy, one will also consider the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in line with the judicial powers of the Court. It is to be noted that the Constitution did not provide for the removal of a governor from office by virtue of defection to another party, unlike section 68(1g) of the Constitution which provides for the vacation of the seat by a member of the National Assembly who defects to another party before the expiration of his term.
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides in section 188 for the removal of the governor from office, but not on the ground of defection to another party. But section 189, also provides for the cessation of the term of office of the governor or deputy governor under certain circumstances which did not also include defection to another party.
However, the big question is, whether the constitution is conclusive on the mode of removal of a governor or deputy governor from office, or the cessation of office of a governor. The answer to this question, will lie in the judicial interpretation of the provisions of sections 188 and 189 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.