 |
| PDP |
THE battle for the control of the ruling People Democratic Party (PDP) and the 2015 Presidency kicked off in Abuja last Thursday on a momentous note as both the anti and pro-Jonathan forces engaged in political fisticuffs with the president’s men appearing to have won round one of the war. From media war to the hardcore confrontation at Wadata Plaza, the national chairman, an old warhorse of the defunct National Party of Nigeria (NPN) survived attempted coup, while President Goodluck Jonathan stepped in to control the fragile situation.
The conclusion of the meeting had agreed to a mid-term convention in July and a convention for the South-West geopolitical zone.
Professor Jerry Gana, a known ally of the president, was made the chairman of the Convention Planning Committee, while former House deputy speaker, Chibudum Nwuche, another ally of the president, was to serve as interim national deputy chairman of the party till convention time. If for any reason, Tukur quits before the convention, Nwuche would step into his shoes in acting capacity, thereby still retaining the key position within the presiden’s caucus.
Alhaji Tukur, however, remains the chairman, despite all push for his removal at the executive committee meeting. The failure to force Tukur out is said to be a strong signal in the fight for the control of the party, while also pointing clearly to a likely no contest in 2015. With the level of agitation against the chairman, with the heavy media back up for the anti-Tukur forces, the outcome may have indicated a possible wrong reading of the political dynamics of the ruling party. This may have helped the Tukur team, which has open negative bashing even as those pushing for a change seem to have neglected the mathematics of the game. In fact, a source, after hearing of the outcome, questioned whether the self-acclaimed field marshal, Governor Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, was at the meeting. Unlike the alleged rabble rousing attacks preceding the meeting, it was gathered that logic and constitutionality prevailed during internal discussions and debates. Tukur had, prior to the meeting, dropped a bombshell by insisting on staying on as chairman on the ground of constitutionalism. Speaking in the early hours of Thursday in Abuja, Tukur said he was elected at a national convention and could only be removed at such a forum. The expectation that the resignation of other executive members would also affect him failed, especially as reason for the resignation was not pressure from the governors or the anti-Jonathan elements.
The linkage between Tukur and the resigning executive members fell flat when it was restated that the report of the electoral commission faulting the process that threw up the other officers was the main ground for the mass resignation. Hence, whether there was uprising or not, those officers would still have to go as the party cannot defy the electoral commission. Tukur, thus, refused resignation since the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) report did not affect his office.
INEC had, a few months ago, declared that the process through which Mr. Metuh and some other members of the PDP National Working Committee (NWC) emerged in the party’s national convention last year was unacceptable and illegal. The electoral umpire had condemned the exercise, noting that the process which produced 12 persons of the 16-member executive council violated paragraph 6.5 (1) of the guidelines for the conduct of the 2012 congresses and national convention and, therefore, void.
The commission had listed the national officers of the party whose election violated the stipulated provision. They are deputy national chairman, Sam Sam Jaja; National Organising Secretary, Abubakar Mustapha; his deputy, Okechukwu Nnadozie; National Publicity Secretary, Olisa Metuh; his deputy, Binta Goje; National Youth Leader, Garba Chiza; his deputy, Dennis Alonge Niyi; Deputy National Auditor, Umar Ibrahim; and National Women Leader, Kema Chikwe.
Othera are Chikwe’s deputy, Hannatu Ulam; Deputy National Treasurer, Claudus Inengas; and National Legal Adviser, Victor Kwon.
According to INEC’s acting director, legal, Ibrahim Bawa, “the mode of election adopted for single candidates was not in accordance with the mode of election stipulated in paragraph 6.5 (i) of the guidelines for the conduct of the 2012 congresses and national convention and, therefore, not acceptable to the commission.”
Thus, contrary to popular conception, the mass resignation was not as a result of governors’ revolt, but due to subsisting report of the electoral umpire. The many court cases affirming INEC’s position could not have been ignored by the party. The attempt to force Tukur out was, thus, left on a shaky foundation. The other ground would have been alleged violations of the party’s constitution. Here, again, tactical errors may have been committed by the anti-Tukur group.
A night to the Thursday meeting, an allegedly faceless group issued two petitions against the chairman, listing all sorts of constitutional breaches and grounds on which removal could be done while still complying with the provisions of the constitution. The first error, according to analysts, was that no prominent leader was associated with the petition, an indication that even the anti-Tukur elements were doing ‘hide and seek.’ Two, the lone person that signed the petition could not state his position and his locus beyond simply putting his name and a notorious one for that matter. Three, he was said to be the only one that signed the petition even though he called it a stakeholders’ forum.
As the petitioner was not a member of the executive committee meeting, it has been said that it is a challenge to see who would take up the petition in the presence of the president and other top leaders of the party. Worst still, the person who signed the petition is from the South-East geopolitical zone whose leaders are hands in glove with the president. Interestingly, the petition, according to observers, enjoyed mass coverage, raising questions about positions already taken in many section of the media. Many observers believe that relying on that type of figure to push the petition undermined the credibility of the Tukur-Must-Go camp.
A source also disclosed that that political Arithmetic does not add up for the anti-Jonathan governors. The president and his men are said to be in control of the party officers from the entire South-South, South-East, South-West, majority of the North-Central and, at least, half of delegates from the North-East and North-West. As put by the source, the president’s men are in comfortable majority within the NEC and the opposition could not have upstaged Tukur, unless the president withdraws his backing for him.
As to the arithmetic adding up, a cursory look showed that of the six geopolitical zones, the president’s men are in charge of, at least, five, leaving only North-West as the ‘problem child.’
Starting with the North-East, the Tukur-Jonathan team is reportedly in charge of Taraba, Borno, Yobe, Bauchi, Gombe and half of Adamawa. For the North-West, the Katsina/Kaduna axis is said to be for the president, with the opposition within having full hold of Jigawa, Kano, Sokoto, Kebbi and Zamfara.
For the North-Central, states like Kogi, Plateau, Benue, Nassarawa and Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory, are said to be fully in the president’s camp with question marks allegedly hanging on Kwara and Niger states.
Down South, both South-South and South-East are said to be a no-go-area for the anti-Jonathan elements within the PDP. For the South-West, the same scenario is reportedly replicated form Osun, Oyo, Ekiti, Ogun, Lagos and even Ondo states. Even in states listed as against the president, it was learnt that there are lone rangers who still camp with the president.
The conclusion of some insiders and even those who detest the Tukur and Jonathan alliance is that within the party, the odds are against anti-Presidency elements. The PDP electoral math is said to favour the president even before deployment of incumbency advantage. That math may be behind the failure to remove Tukur and may have also been responsible for the nature of the caretaker committee that emerged at the Thursday NEC meeting.
It is, however, not yet Uhuru for Tukur and the Presidency. The governors are not likely to back down and, in fact, they may see the real battle as coming up in mid July when the mini national convention will hold. Will Tukur be on the chair till then? If so, will he re-contest? If not, who is likely to be sponsored in his stead? Permutations are ongoing, but observers are quick to accept that the real war may be in July, while last Thursday may just be a rehearsal.
As the various camps are re-strategising, certain options are surfacing for contending caucuses. For the president’s side, the need to reconsider the Tukur candidacy in the next convention is paramount. But even if Tukur is dropped, his replacement will still be a president’s man. Whatever the pressure level is, the existing geopolitics within the PDP will still give the president’s camp an edge. Hence, a Tukur may only be handing over to a Tukur in another guise. It is also politically right to note that as long as the math does not change, presidential control of the party may remain beyond 2015 elections.
The second option is that those opposed to the president’s hold on the party may either back down or openly revolt by pulling out of the party. The option of pulling out may be risky as that may box them mainly to the North-West and into the arm of the opposition that is already concluding its internal power sharing agreements. The option of staying on to constitute a flank of the ruling party demands courage, especially in an underdeveloped economy like Nigeria.
The long and short of the preceding is that the July battle is a key one that will point to 2015. While last Thursday has shown the trend, July will conclusively show where the pendulum swings ahead of 2015 presidential convention of the ruling party. If the president’s men retain control in July, then, Jonathan’s undeclared ambition to secure the ticket of the party may be a foregone conclusion.
But where do all these leave the opposition party? Expectation was obviously very high about a break-up of the PDP. While many shared this possibility, those who know the dynamics of the ruling party are not likely to believe such postulation. The opposition coalition’s break up theory does not take into account issues of mutual interest, personal needs for protection and fears of quitting the ruling caucus for an unsure platform.
The day may, however, still be young and it may be too early to conclude that the opposition goofed. The next few days will show a clear trend. For now, the president appears to be in control in the face of stiff assault from internal opposition.
Source: Tribune
No comments:
Post a Comment