PDP and the Bayelsa logjam

Three critical issues are thrown up by the Bayelsa Gubernatorial log-jam—by the way the President does not think there is any need for undue concern as he urges the PDP to resist any intimidation from any quarters and go ahead and effect the result of an election which the court has ruled against holding; an […]

Three critical issues are thrown up by the Bayelsa Gubernatorial log-jam—by the way the President does not think there is any need for undue concern as he urges the PDP to resist any intimidation from any quarters and go ahead and effect the result of an election which the court has ruled against holding; an election which INEC has boycotted, apparently in due regard to the  court ruling and an election which manifests the internal squabbles within the party—as four key aspirants and 157 delegates boycotted the elections!

The first real issue in contest is whether the PDP gubernatorial primary election in Bayelsa held last Saturday can remain legitimate and valid when there is a court injunction against its holding. There are two arguments on the hot plate. One, which the PDP legal apologists flaunt, is that the judiciary, under the electoral act, is not empowered to intervene in party primaries and thus its injunction that the election should not hold is tantamount to a nullity.  Constitutional lawyer, Festus Okoye subtly interrogates this position, dangling Section 87/10 of the amended Electoral Act of 2010 which he says bars the courts from disallowing the conduct of primary elections. Most of those who boycotted the election argued that the ruling of an Abuja High court was binding on all law abiding citizens in the party. What is the ultimate position of the rule of law? Should there be a situation in which the ruling of a court could be flouted? Is the National Assembly’s clause in the electoral law not a direct affront and in conflict with the Constitution? Should the Executive at the centre, whose key duty is to protect the Constitution, be able to support any act or omission/commission which equates an infringement of the Constitution and err on the side of legalism or political correctness? Here is the critical dilemma in this instance.

The second issue is the legal implication of the absence of INEC in the primary election. Since INEC has avoided participation (I prefer this approach since INEC has not said it boycotted the election) in the Bayelsa Gubernatorial primaries, will it be held liable if it does not give recognition to it and went ahead to reject the outcome of the election? INEC, it appears to me, acted in due regard to the court ruling at Abuja. Again, Okoye’s interpretation of the electoral law is that even though INEC is ‘tasked with the responsibility of supervising primary elections, but there is no form of sanctions if it does not or is not invited to do so.’ Okoye avers that INEC is not empowered by the electoral act to reject the nominations submitted to it by a political party. This is a quaint anomaly, as it were. What is the purpose of a supervisory clause if it is of no effect? What quality assurance measure is in place if INEC must accept the result of an election which it does not supervise? What freeness, credibility or fairness can be guaranteed by the electoral body of the nation if it accepted the result of an election that it did not supervise or monitor? By these tokens, neither the courts, which pronounced an injunction on the conduct of the election, and whose order by Justice Kolawole, was flouted, nor INEC which stayed away from the election, have powers to reject the results of the election. A lawyer, Dame Carol Ajie, even argues that the judge that granted the injunction could be penalized if the PDP made bold to report him to the Chief Justice of Nigeria!

The third issue is the political dimension of power-play in this election and its implications for the health of the state and the country at large. There is a definite power game in the gubernatorial politics in Bayelsa in which the President of the nation is alleged to be an interested party. Presidents are mightily powerful and can, and have been seen in the past, deploy their legal and acquired powers to influence the direction of party politics, both at the state and at the national levels. The case of Fayose in Ekiti, Mbadinuju and Ngige in Anambra and Joshua Dariye of Pateau States are veritable points of reference where the interests of the Presidency had manifestly affected the electoral misfortunes of incumbent Governors.   The disqualification or in fact the banning of Sylva from contesting the election on the platform of the PDP has been believably interpreted as an outcome of the power tussle between the sitting President of the nation and the incumbent Governor, two stalwarts between whom there have been no love lost. Discerning minds in the political arena of Bayelsa attribute the political fiasco in Bayelsa to the ‘battle for supremacy between the governor and the president.’ There has been loud rumour that Sylva had not been friendly with the President’s ambition, as far back as when the former sought the acting position in the Presidency during the protracted illness of late President Yar’Adua. There have been no vehement denials. Neither has the President himself made a robust self-distanciation from the politics in his state. There is a call here for people in power to begin to act as statesmen rather than parochial power-seekers, to the detriment of socio-political coherence and harmony in the state and in the nation at large.

In the event of a political cull de sac—in the event of INEC and the law courts rejecting the outcome of the controversial PDP primary, there is a strong possibility that the PDP may be unable to field a candidate for the gubernatorial election in February in Bayelsa. What is worse in the matter is that there is no visible opposition on the ground in Bayelsa – as the President himself has announced with obvious excitement.  It is a pity that the tottering giant, the PDP, will again wobble away with the chaos on the ground in Bayelsa on account of the absence of a virile and dynamic opposition in the state to inherit the misfortune of the PDP. Pity. All said and done, we have not heard the last of the political imbroglio occasioned by the power tussle at play in Bayelsa – one that carries a veritable disaster signal for the state in particular and the country at large. Something positive must happen in that state so as not to exacerbate the political tension in the Niger Delta and the entire nation, on account of impish politics and politicians.