THE opposition coalition is moving unceasingly towards the creation of a grand coalition under the All Progressives Congress to challenge the ruling Peoples Democratic Party in 2015, just as many observers are worried at the booby traps that still dot the path of the coalition, investigations by The Friday Edition, has revealed. Despite the controversy over similar acronym and ongoing legal challenges in an Abuja court, the coalition leaders had pushed ahead relentlessly in their bid to fulfill the conditions of the electoral act for merger and fusion into a party. All the three merger partners have conducted their conventions and duly resolved to fuse into the new All Progressives Congress. From the beginning to the conclusion of the conventions, the opposition leaders were truly on edge as repeated reports of threats not to register the new coalition always rent the air wave. While the Action Congress of Nigeria was on surer ground than other partners, both the All Nigerian Peoples Party (ANPP) and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) also overcome their internal dissentions to fuse into the new party. For the ANPP, the initial foot-dragging of some of its top chieftains was surprisingly overcome. Those within the party who felt the merger was an arrangement to favour the former presidential candidate of the party, Ibrahim Shekarau took time before they were convinced. What is more, the wing of the party that are normally sympathetic to the PDP, was lured to remain faithful to the opposition at least for the first time. The unanimity achieved within the ANPP fold was described by insiders as a consequence of persistent lobbying and intervention by leaders of the ACN. The party had experienced serious crisis when one of its chieftains, Mallam Isa Bala wrote the party chairman, Dr Ogbonaya Onu calling for an end to ANPP’s involvement in the merger on the ground that all the parties to the arrangement were not being treated equally. The letter dated April 2 and signed by the convener of the group and the Usuma ward Chairman of the ANPP, in Bwari Area Council, Abuja, Mallam Isa Bala, was copied to INEC chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega. It is entitled, “Merger/APC crisis: How we have been fooled & deceived by Bola Tinubu/ACN party (the secret Tinubu is hiding from us (merging partners).” In the letter, the group alleged that the All Progressives Congress (APC) was the brainchild of a former Lagos State Governor, Bola Tinubu, who had in 2006 formed a political group with the acronym, APC. According to it , the same APC, which was registered in January 2006 transformed to the ACN in August 2006 under Tinubu’s leadership .It argued that the same people who sponsored the “failed” APC were insisting on the acronym just to expand their political empire. A copy of the letter read as follows: “The merger could have also provided a strong two -party system in Nigeria which will produce a virile opposition as it is obtained in advanced democracies of the world. The gains of the merger cannot be over-emphasised as the generality of Nigerians had anxiously waited for its realisation. “The interest of our great party is evidently, not adequately protected, in the present merging arrangement. Therefore, our party cannot surrender its identity that all our founding fathers have laboured for, to satisfy the interest of an individual. Consequently, we give our national leadership three weeks to suspend their involvement in the merger if this anomaly is not corrected. We also urge our national leadership to start discussing the possibility of forming alliance with the Congress for Progressive Change and other political parties on basis of mutual respect and equality for one another in the 2015 general elections. “On this note, we encourage the CPC led by General (Muhammadu) Buhari to also review its stance and stake in the merger arrangement, as it is a hoax that can yield no political or democratic dividend.As earlier advocated, an alliance with CPC and other political parties where Gen. Buhari, a time-tested leader is presented as a presidential candidate, will garner an overwhelming acceptance from Nigerians.” The party leadership moved quickly to nip the crisis in the bud. Its National Publicity Secretary, Chief Emma Eneuku, dismissed members of the group as impostors who were being used to distract the merger. According to him, He said, “Bala is not a member of our party. He is just one of those people they are using to distract what we are doing. A member of my party cannot just write INEC, we have a NEC (National Executive Committee) meeting on the 11th of this month, where everybody will come. Anyone who does not like what we are doing can approach the party. When somebody is working like this, you know he is not working for our party” The revolt failed woefully and Dr Ogbonaya led the party into the merger. Alhaji Bala was expelled at the ratification convention held in Gusau last weekend. For the CPC, the journey was equally tortuous especially as the party had many court cases arising from internal factions existing prior to the merger politics. The issue of ownership of the party still hangs in the air and within its fold; big elements also opposed the merger bid wondering if 2011 betrayal will not repeat itself. The CPC case was even more testy as a court action different from the factional suit nearly stopped the convention from holding. Luckily for the CPC, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja presided over by Honourable Justice A.F.A Ademola dismissed the case filed by some former Senators and House of Representatives members from Katsina State against the party seeking to nullify the National Convention of the party held in the Eagle Square, Abuja in January 2011, in which the present national officers were elected. If this had been achieved, the CPC leaders, who entered into the merger agreement, would have lost their position and the merger entered into would have become null and void. In the Suit No.FHC/ABJ/CS/302/2012, Hon. Mohammed Tukur Sada and six others as plaintiffs sued the CPC, Prince Tony Momoh; Alhaji Sule Hamma; Buba Galadima and the Independent National Electoral Commission seeking the following reliefs thus: •An Order of this Honourable Court that the National Convention of the 1st Defendant held at Abuja between 4th to 6th January, 2011 contrary to Article 27 (i) (j) and (k) and Article 27 (c) (i) of the Constitution of the 1st Defendant is null and void and no effect (sic). •An Order that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants elected at the 1st Defendants€™s National Convention held at Abuja between 4th to 6th January, 2011, were not validly elected and their said election be declared null and void. •An Order that the 2nd and 4th Defendants be restrained from functioning and parading themselves as the National Chairman and National Secretary of the 1st Defendant respectively. However, the 1st-4th Defendants through their Counsel, Chief Okoi Obono-Obla took an objection to the jurisdiction of the Court to hear and determine the case on the grounds thus: •Whether this Honourable Court has the jurisdiction to hear and entertain Reliefs Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the Originating Summons sought by the Plaintiffs in view of the provisions of Section 251 (1) (p) (q) and (r) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999) (as amended)? •Whether an action founded on a letter by 5th Defendant on the 11th of January, 2011, is maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 2 (1) (a) of the Public Officers Protection Act, 2004? •Whether the Plaintiffs complied with the internal conflict Resolution mechanism inherent in Article 18 (32) of the Constitution of the 1st Defendant, as amended, before instituting this action, and if the answer is in the negative, whether this Court has the jurisdiction to hear and entertain this action? •Whether the plaintiffs in general and the 7th and 8th plaintiffs in particular have the locus standi to institute this action? •Whether the plaintiffs have joined all the necessary parties to this action to enable this court make an effective and effectual determination of all the issues in controversy in this case? In the judgment delivered on Wednesday the 8th May, 2013 Honourable Justice Ademola sustained the objection filed by the 1st-4th Defendants and held that from the totality of the evidence before and the reliefs sought by the plaintiffs in their Originating Summons, the plaintiffs woefully failed to show that they have locus standi to file the case. The Court held that the Plaintiffs have not shown that they candidates in the election to elect members of the National Executive Committee in the said National Convention. The Court further held that the suit was statute bared because the letter written by the Independent National Electoral Commission dated 11th January, 2011 on which the Plaintiffs premised their case established that the cause of action arose on the 12th January, 2011 but the Plaintiffs failed their case more than one year after the cause of action arose. The Court also held that by virtue of Section 2 (1) of the Public Officers Protection Act, 2004, the case was statute barred. The Court dismissed the case and awarded a cost of N10,000 each against all the Plaintiffs in favour of the Defendants. Despite the court ruling, another round of report went round just two days to the ratification convention indicating that the convention had been postponed. The CPC leadership acted quickly, denying any court action stopping the convention. According to Rotimi Fashakin of the CPC, the report was utterly false. “First, we hereby use this medium that there was no such Court injunction. Second, this piece of mendacious impudence was the handiwork of unscrupulous individuals who lost their case against the party and have resorted to other extra-legal means. Third, we reiterate the fact that the Party’s convention shall hold as scheduled on Saturday, 11th May, 2013 at 10:00am and the venue remains Eagle Square, Abuja. “Fourth, we hereby appeal for calm from our teeming supporters and members who have been horrified by this unfortunate rumour. Fifth, the National Leadership of the Party remains resolute in ensuring that, the merger with the other political Parties, is implemented with undiminished pertinacity,” the party spokesman said. Unlike the ANPP, the CPC still has some grey areas to sort out. How the factional cases play out will determine the fate of the CPC. But for now, the party has reached its destination with a convention ratifying its merger to form the APC. Can APC Stops APC? While the conventions were ongoing from Lagos to Gusau and Abuja, the rival African Peoples Congress ‘denied’ registration by the electoral commission was fuming, warning against any tampering with its acronym as the case is now in court. As the ANPP and CPC were preparing for their convention, the legal adviser of the APC, Nnamdi Kingsley issued a statement as follows: “Whereas it is a public knowledge that we the Africa People Congress (APC) a political association seeking registration as a political party in Nigeria complied with the requirements of the Constitution and Electoral Act for party registration but was denied registration by INEC, we have restored to the provisions of the law especially Section 79 of the Electoral Act which provided for judicial review of INEC decision of non registration of a Political Party. “The non registration of our association is being challenged in Federal High Court Abuja in suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/224/2013 led by a Constitutional lawyer Awa Kalu (SAN) and the court processes properly served on INEC after several attempts by the commission to evade service. As law-abiding citizens of Nigeria, our association continues to hope that justice would be dispensed in this matter as we eagerly await the court’s pronouncement on our registration. These desperate and undemocratic elements who tagged themselves “progressive politicians” have been busy holding conventions and adopting our acronym as their merger acronym and threatening to make this country ungovernable if they are not registered with our acronym – APC. “The Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) held their convention a few weeks ago and adopted our acronym to the glare of INEC observers and Yesterday (11th of May, 2013). The All Nigerians Peoples Party (ANPP) and Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) have also concluded their conventions and adopted our acronym in the presence of INEC observers. As we have been alleging that INEC has become a willing tool in the hands of these selfish and lawless individuals, officials of INEC have finally proved that the Commission has merged with the merger group as it can be adduced by the compromising stance of the Commission on the merger group. INEC and the merger group are clearly aware that our acronym is not available for use by any Association or group by virtue of being the subject matter of the pending litigation in court rather they believe that they can intimidate us through the collaborative effort of INEC to frustrate our registration,” the association alleged. The issue could not be a headache for the merging parties but for the fact that the hearing of the case has now taken off in the Abuja court. The court has indeed ruled that the African Peoples Congress can proceed to challenge its non-registration by the electoral commission. Both APCs have been laying claim to the acronym for some time now. While the All Progressives Congress claimed the acryomn was its intellectual property, the rival African Peoples Congress affirmed that the electoral act has no provision for intellectual property. While the All Progressives Congress said it had complied with the electoral act by making its ownership of the acronym public, the African Peoples Congress said only it complied with the provisions of the act for party registration. The APC in court is faulting the commission for its non registration. INEC had rejected the application on the ground that full address was not provided by the association. The association legal adviser however countered that the party substantially complied with the provision of the electoral act, positing that addresses as prescribed in the act were provided. “INEC cannot add or remove from the law, We provided address and if they need more address, they should have called us instead of denying us registration. The court will determine that,” Kingsley, its legal adviser said. The APC is also daring the merging parties to beware of claiming its acronym. According to Kingsey, “the merging parties s should know that we are in court. We are APC and we put it to them that even as at now, the merging parties have not submitted application for registration. What they did was to notify INEC which is not known to the law. “You cannot reserve name. This is not CAC. INEC is not a CAC.We will take this fight to any level to claim our right,” the legal adviser said. Watchers of the political field are worried that even if INEC registered the opposition coalition, the court action may remain a threat until and unless the case is disposed in favour of the electoral commission.
Posted on: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:18:59 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015