“The court will never allow a political party to act arbitrarily or as it likes. Political parties must obey their own constitution, and once this is done there would be orderliness, and this would be good for politics and the country.”
The above judicial pronouncement came off Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour, JSC, as he then was, while delivering judgment in Uzodinma vs. Izunaso in 2011. And, it is the reason many card carrying members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), in Anambra State, are in court seeking to invalidate, and nullify, the June 26 primary election of the party which held at the Women Development center in Awka. Outcome of the several suits will determine if the PDP will have a candidate for the governorship election holding on November 6.
Crux of the matter here is that the PDP set aside its own constitution and guidelines in the conduct of its primary election in Anambra state. The litigants are also worried that PDP abused its own internal processes by going into the primary election with persons it advertised as ‘super delegates’, a term not known to the PDP constitution. Further, the PDP conducted the primary election with only 218 ‘super delegates’ against its own constitutional provision to use statutory delegates and 3-man adhoc delegates. The 3-man adhoc delegates, according to the PDP constitution, must have been elected at ward congresses. Further, the PDP constitution mandated that the primary election should be held on the formation of a quorum of two third majorities of the statutory delegates and adhoc delegates.
Now, this is where the PDP leadership mortally shot itself. The statutory delegates of the PDP constitute about 2268 statutory delegates from the 326 wards of the state. The 3-man adhoc delegates from each of the 326 wards constitute about 978. According to the PDP Constitution, two-thirds majority of these delegates ought to vote to pick the party’s candidate. But in its wisdom, or lack of it, the PDP leadership publicly announced the jettisoning of these constitutional mandates.
In its place, the party leadership announced a list of an unconstitutional ‘super delegates’ of 230 in all, a number that did not even come close to the formation of two-third quorum. The party, acting perhaps in a spell of mortal confusion, further changed the list of the said ‘super delegates’, midway into the accreditation and announced a list of 218 ‘super delegates’ as final list of those to vote in the election. Either way, the constitutional mandate on quorum, as stipulated at Section 25(4) of the PDP constitution, was not fulfilled. But voting went on nonetheless.
Note that Article 25 (1) of the PDP Constitution established the State Congress as an organ of the party which basic constitutional mandate was to vote at the party’s primary election to pick a candidate to fly the party’s flag at the governorship election. That section of the PDP constitution also listed who qualifies as a member of the state congress. They include: the state chairman who the constitution of the party said shall chair the congress. Others are serving and former elected presidents or vice-presidents who are members of the party from the state; serving and former governors and deputy governors if they are members of the party; governorship candidates of the party and their deputies; serving and former Board of Trustee (BoT) members from the state (if they are still with the party); members of the state executive committee; serving and former members of the National Executive committee and serving member of the Zonal Executive committee from the state who are still in the party.
Others listed in that section of the PDP constitution are serving and former members of the National Assembly from the state who are still with the party and serving members of the State House of Assembly and former principal officer of the state House of assembly who are still with the party.
All elected local government council chairmen and their deputies, all National Assembly candidates of the party, three delegates per ward elected at ward congresses, one of whom shall be a woman, former members of the state working committee, former local government area party chairmen, one physically challenged person per local government area, all serving local government councilors, all serving chairmen, deputy chairmen, secretaries, women and youth leaders of all wards in the state and one national delegate per local government area elected at the local government area congress are also listed as members of the state congress and entitled to vote at the primary election.
All those listed as former are required to still be members of the party to qualify to be members of the state congress.
The above list was clearly spelt out in Article 25 (1) of the PDP constitution. However, PDP refused to abide by its own constitution here. It threw away its constitution and ingeniously manufactured a list of unconstitutional super delegates to vote at the primary. In the process, it brazenly disenfranchised and abused the constitutional rights of its own members. In the bid to achieve a probable pre-determined plot, the party created more problems for itself by way of even bringing in persons who are not on the party’s register as members, to exercise the constitutional franchise of its members.
PDP’s defence to this brazen and flagrant abuse of its own constitution was that it was forced by situations created by legal disputes over the leadership of the state chapter of the party to permit the abuse of its constitution and disenfranchisement of its members. But, thus far, there is no judicial pronouncement ordering the party to dissolve its State Congress in Anambra state. Also, there is no evidence that the judicial pronouncement on the state leadership of the party was also a judicial order to amend Article 25(1) of its constitution. Even where there is need to amend any section of the party’s constitution, it is still not a function that the National Executive of the party could expressly do by a mere statement to the press or an advertorial. Amendment of party constitution is a rigorous process that is finally adopted by the national convention.
The problems that PDP has now created for itself in Anambra had earlier been resolved by the Court of Appeal in Olalere vs. Oye, where the court held that “a political party is bound by its constitution and any action taken, which is not in conformity with the constitution of such political party, is null and void and of no effect.”
This pronouncement has now given impetus to disenfranchised statutory delegates to seek redress and nullify the primary election of June 26.
(We shall continue this discourse next hursday)