ONDO State governor Rotimi Akeredolu is a very fortunate man. Referencing the split decision of four to three that gave him victory at the Supreme Court last week, he went back to judicial history to insinuate that he didn’t just win by the skin of his teeth, but that counting from the tribunal judgement through to the unanimous Appeal Court decision in his favour, his victory becomes more substantial and very legitimate than the apex court decision suggests on the surface. His explanations are superfluous. Victory is victory, whether by a hair’s breadth or by a landslide. If his main opponent in the October 10, 2020 governorship election, Eyitayo Jegede, had secured an upset at the apex court, after winning just three local governments out of 18, it would have been an undeserved technical victory. Mr Akeredolu won 15 local governments and beat Mr Jegede by almost 100,000 votes.
It is understandable why Mr Akeredolu is mortified by the Supreme Court’s split decision. While he dithered considerably in his first term, and even seemed lethargic, aloof and inconsiderate, indeed apolitical, he has come into his own in his second term, a seemingly consummate politician with an uncanny feel for the yearnings and agonies of Ondo people. He reminds the Southwest and Ondo of the boldness and courage of former Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) governors and politicians, a man with the character to face up to the manipulations and hegemonic drivel of the central government in Abuja. But it was not even the vivification of his governorship that gave him victory last October; what stood him well with the electorate was that he had begun to stir himself, seemed more reliable, and had immersed himself in some infrastructural renewal of Ondo that persuaded the electorate to stay with a somewhat safe and tested hand.
Mr Jegede is no pushover himself. A lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) like Mr Akeredolu, he seemed strangely more eloquent, more self-assured, very urbane, and a team player who was quaintly more cosmopolitan. There was no indication that he put up a facade during the election. Undoubtedly, he fought a good fight, and if he had won, would possibly have made a great governor. But perhaps his party was the albatross around his neck. Ondo State was, in short, fortunate in the last governorship election to have two eminently qualified candidates facing each other. Either one would have deserved victory. Mr Akeredolu probably recognizes this fact, and has spoken to his opponent in conciliatory tones and related with him suavely. Judging from Mr Jegede’s reaction to the Supreme Court decision, in which he has congratulated the governor and managed to not damn the judiciary with faint praise, the state may experience more boisterous politics in the next polls.
However, it was not the personality and character of the candidates that made the apex court decision reverberate around the country. Reporters, analysts, and aggrieved APC chieftains have quoted the minority judgement with gusto, inflicted it upon the polity, and weaponised it against scheming APC leaders who hijacked the party from former chairman Adams Oshiomhole, and turned it into a stepping stone for the elevation of a wing of the ruling party, the belittlement of other wings and leaders, and the erasure of the party’s vibrant culture. Lawyers do not tend to place so much weight on minority judgements, except for academic purposes, let alone cite them as precedents. But for reasons that are not too puzzling, the country is abuzz over the minority judgement read by Justice Mary Odili.
The petitioners wanted the apex court to disqualify the caretaker chairman, Mai Mala Buni, and nullify all he had done for functioning as governor and party chairman at the same time on the grounds that both Section 183 of the Constitution and Article 17(4) of the APC Constitution bar him from doing so. And if he could not exercise both powers, it meant that he had no right to author the nomination of Candidate Akeredolu in last year’s election. Both the majority and minority judgements do not disagree on the interpretation of the relevant constitutional provisions guiding the nomination of party candidates. Their disagreement centres on whether the petitioners joined or did not join Mr Buni as party to the suit. In finding the petitioners’ case incompetent, the majority judgement insisted that not joining the Yobe governor as a party to the suit, when all the issues in the appeal revolved around him, was fatal to their case. The party was already joined, argued the minority judgement on the other hand, and since Mr Buni was nothing more than an agent of the APC, it was superfluous to join him. Surely, it could not be this delicate difference that is now being weaponised by Buni haters.
Beyond whether Mr Buni was joined or not joined as a party to the suit, or whether he was thus afforded the opportunity to defend himself or not as the lead judgement implied, is the far more central and now weaponised issue of whether an unelected National Executive Committee (NEC) could author the nomination of party candidates, and by extension the organisation of congresses. The APC constitution does not envisage the party could do without an elected NEC for a whole year. Indeed, originally, scheming party leaders who kicked out the Oshiomhole-led executives had intended the caretaker committee to, in six months, organise the election of national officers, which would in turn organise the congresses. But soon after assuming responsibility for the party, the caretaker committee expanded its mandate and operations to include updating party registers and other ancillary matters. After extending their tenure twice in circumstances that may eventually be litigated, party leaders (read, the president) as well as members are no longer sure when a national convention would be organised. Everything has become tentative and drawn-out in the party.
Comments
Post a Comment