Buni’s status: Confusion at APC secretariat, Buhari’s aides, minister insist on dissolution of committee

KEY stakeholders in the All Progressives Congress (APC) have continued to give divergent opinions and legal interpretations to the pronouncements by Supreme Court Justices on the eligibility of the Yobe State governor and chairman caretaker and extraordinary convention planning committee, Mai Mala Buni to hold both elective and party positions. 

On Thursday, two of President Muhammadu Buhari’s aides joined the league of APC chieftains smarting for the dissolution of the caretaker committee. Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the October 10, 2020 governorship election, Eyitayo Jegede, in his petition, had argued that Buni, according to section 183 of the constitution and Article 17(4) of the APC, could not function both as governor and acting chairman of the APC concurrently. His prayer was hinged on the fact that the acting national chairman of the APC and Yobe governor was the one who forwarded Akeredolu’s name to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the candidate of the APC. 

The PDP candidate asserted that Akeredolu’s nomination breached the law and as such, his election should be nullified. Justices Mary Peter-Odili, Justices Ejembi Eko and Ibrahim Saulawa, in their minority judgment, declared that Akeredolu’s election should have been nullified while the appellants, (PDP and Jegede) declared winner of the October 20 poll. 

Against the backdrop of the minority judgment, Minister of State, Labour and Employment, Festus Keyamo, in a private memo to the party stakeholders, which had since went viral, called for a halt to the ward congresses slated for Saturday, while he equally demanded that machinery be set in motion to see to the exit of Buni-led committee from APC national secretariat. The PDP, in a similar vein, called for the dissolution of APC interim leadership. 

In a joint statement, Senators Babafemi Ojudu and Ita Enang, Special Adviser to the President on Political Matters and Senior Special Assistant to the President on Niger Delta Affairs, respectively asked stakeholders in APC to shut the gate of APC national secretariat against Buni and his team. 

The duo argued that the minority judgment should not be disregarded as they claimed that it has far-reaching implications on the party in the face of forthcoming governorship elections in Anambra and other offseason elections. They called for a halt to Saturday ward congresses, slated to hold across the country. Chief Adeniyi Akintola, one of the lead counsels of Governor Akeredolu in the election petition at Supreme Court, however, differed. 

Addressing newsmen on Thursday at the APC national secretariat in Abuja, Chief Akintola faulted the position canvassed by Chief Keyamo and certain chieftains of the party. He told newsmen that no court in the land would attach value to a minority judgment, as he noted that it was of no value.

He maintained that by the pronouncements of the election petition tribunal and the Court of Appeal, which was affirmed by the apex court, Buni could combine both party and elective positions. 

“In 2008, Abubakar Atiku versus Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, there was a minority judgment given by Justice George Oguntade, Justice Walter Onnoghen and one other justice, while Justice Niki Tobi delivered the majority judgment. So, there has always been precedence. 

“There is no value attributed to minority judgment. So, what happened yesterday isn’t strange. We are worried that some lawyers are attaching value to it. Section 183, according to the justices, wasn’t violated by Buni. That was the reasoning of the tribunal. The Court of Appeal even affirmed the election petition stance that Section 183 wasn’t breached,” he said. 

He affirmed that the congresses can go on as scheduled. 

Also speaking, Senator John James Akpanudoedehe, secretary of the committee, maintained that party faithful had nothing to worry about, while assuring that the ward congresses fixed for tomorrow would not be halted. He alleged that certain aggrieved chieftains of the party are anxious to cause confusion and instigate crisis in the party by giving conflicting interpretations to the judgment of the Supreme Court. 

“Some people want to use the judgment to vent their anger. I want to assure you that the congresses will be held across the country. We shall be fair to all, and be firm. We remain committed and loyal to the Buhari administration. We won’t be used to bring down the government of Buhari. We would hold the congresses as scheduled,” he said. 

Deputy Senate President and senator representing Delta Central, Ovie OmoAgege, aligned with the position of Chief Akintola and Senator Akpanudoedehe. 

In a statement he personally signed and made available to newsmen in Abuja, Omo-Agege said the party has no reason to entertain any fear over the eligibility of Governor Buni to hold party and elective positions, concurrently. 

Shittu, Onigbinde, Ojo caution APC

A former minister of communications, Adebayo Shittu, asked leaders of the party to take the lessons of the judgment and immediately appoint new national officers to conduct the congresses of APC. 

Describing the judgment as one that had saved the party from the precipice of mass electoral defeat, he urged the party to appoint a national chairman, whether in acting capacity or otherwise, who does not hold any other office of government. 

He warned that the party is at risk of a nullification of all its congresses, conventions and technical loss of its elections should the party proceed with Saturday’s congress without taking the necessary steps. 

On his part, a former Oyo State Commissioner for Justice and Attorney General, Mr Mutalabi Ojo, said the congress should go as planned, since there was nothing in the majority judgment stalling the conduct of the congress. 

Ojo said: “I am yet to see the judgment and read it in full, but from what I have read, the Supreme Court did not say that Buni should not have held the position of the chairman. It was the minority judgment that said so. The minority judgment is not a judgment of the court; it is of no use. The majority judgment is the judgment of the court and what the majority judgment said is that since allegations were made against Buni and Buni was not joined as a party to the suit, they couldn’t consider that allegation, so, the appeal was incompetent.” 

Also, a senior lawyer, Chief Akin Onigbinde, said the APC is expected to review its actions with a view to correcting them, failure of which will amount to impunity. He called for respect for the rule of law, noting that it was illegal for Buni to hold the position of governor and chairman of a political party at the same time. 

Onigbinde said, “The secretary and chairmanship positions are critical to the political party. Buni can’t hold the position of governor and at the same time be the chairman of the political party. “The saving grace was that Buni was not joined as a party to the suit. That is why the outcome can’t affect Buni. Again, APC would not have joined him because he has immunity as a governor, unless he was sued as an individual,” he said. 

We often take APC constitution for granted – Ex-Kogi acting gov 

Citing Section 183 of the constitution, a forrmer acting governor of Kogi State and APC stalwart, Abdullahi Bello, said the narrow victory of the party at the Supreme Court should call for caution on the part of members. 

According to him, there are so many other actions of the party, which predate the present time that, if questioned and subjected to judicial scrutiny, their outcomes could be terrible and unpredictable.

 

YOU SHOULD NOT MISS THESE HEADLINES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE

Lagos Is Second Least Liveable City In The World For 2021

Lagos is the second least liveable city in the world for the year 2021. This is according to the most recent annual ranking put together by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)…

FACT CHECK: Did UNICEF Say Blocking Children’s Access To Pornography Constitutes Human Rights’ Infringement?

CLAIM 1: A Twitter user claims UNICEF said any efforts to block children from accessing pornography might infringe their human rights.

VERDICT: MISLEADING!