PDP and notion of ‘sole’ presidential candidate

That decision has subsequently been ratified by the party’s Board of Trustees (BOT) as well as other organs of the party, such as National Caucus and National Working Committee (NWC).This decision apparently was in conformity with, and affirmation of, the position of PDP governors who had earlier promoted the idea of  sole candidature as part […]

That decision has subsequently been ratified by the party’s Board of Trustees (BOT) as well as other organs of the party, such as National Caucus and National Working Committee (NWC).
This decision apparently was in conformity with, and affirmation of, the position of PDP governors who had earlier promoted the idea of  sole candidature as part of a deal in which first timers among them were promised automatic second term tickets and right of first refusal.
Whatever consideration informed the party’s decision, it raises several concerns about party internal democracy, and the political fortunes of any other presidential aspirant of the party. While the party leadership may pretend that the move is a breakthrough with respect to its options in the forthcoming 2015 presidential elections, its implications for the generality of the party members point in a different direction.
The PDP constitution prescribes the process of primaries for the selection of a candidate for the post of president of the country. Section 17.2 (a) of the constitution provides that “in the conduct of primaries for the post of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the primary shall be held at the National Convention of the party specially convened for the purpose”.
Coming ahead of the party’s National Convention, the sole candidature move suggests Jonathan’s assumed pre-eminence on grounds that are not in the public domain. A primary election would have provided the party the platform to select the best possible candidate from a wider field of candidates and in conformity with the democratic tradition.  Essentially the primary would have provided the party’s leadership the ground to justify its conviction of the supposed pre-eminence of Jonathan over other candidates.
In the absence of such a process, the sole candidacy option is an intimidation tool intended to silence and crowd out other potential aspirants, and is tantamount to a tacit subversion of their interests. Already the situation has attracted spirited opposition from aggrieved aspirants in the party who have expressed their positions on it, including a possible resort to litigation, which might be a good thing in itself because the nation’s democratic practices would benefit from it.
Besides, the party’s move is in breach of the guidelines of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) with respect to the commencement of campaigns for electoral offices by political parties. The action constitutes the conferment of overwhelming advantage on Jonathan over any other aspirant, both within and outside the PDP. Moreover, Jonathan has not clearly stated his interest in the forthcoming election. There might be legal and procedural obstacles that inform his hesitance; therefore to crown him when he has not expressed interest in the stool is premature.
The PDP leadership needs to exercise discretion in its handling of this issue to ensure that no untoward consequence follows its trail. As the ruling party at the national level and in a majority of state and local government areas, the internal affairs of the PDP are of deep interest to the nation, a point that should be appreciated by the leadership of the party.
The PDP needs to demonstrate a verifiably credible stand on its commitment to the tenets of democracy and the rule of law in all of its activities. Acting in manners that are against conventions and rules portrays it in poor light, and raises apprehension of the possibility of it replicating them in actual governance conditions.