Perspective on AGF’s letter on APGA crisis

Within the last decade, the APGA has made itself the most crisis-ladenin the present democratic dispensation in Nigeria. The leadership crises in the party defined its existence in the nation’s polity. During the 2005 Political Reform Conference, the issue of who should represent the party also featured. Then, the founder and National Chairman, Chief Chekwas […]

Within the last decade, the APGA has made itself the most crisis-ladenin the present democratic dispensation in Nigeria. The leadership crises in the party defined its existence in the nation’s polity. During the 2005 Political Reform Conference, the issue of who should represent the party also featured. Then, the founder and National Chairman, Chief Chekwas Okorie and not Chief Victor Umeh was recognized after a series of correspondences between the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC) and the Presidency under Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. However, for the ongoing National Conference, INEC was not consulted perhaps on account of the fact that the commission has been joined in most of the siuts   at various Courts around the country.
Apart from the fact that INEC is a party to various suits in the APGA leadership crises, there are reasons to believe that the electoral umpire may have contributed to the musical chairs in the party by failing to play its role effectively through its department of Political Party Monitoring Committee. It is on the strength of this that the implications of the AGF’s letter on the APGA conundrum should be weighed especially given a similar disputation of who between Governor Willie Obiano and Dr. Chike Obidigbo, was the authentic governorship candidate of the APGA in the November 16, 2013 election in Anambra State.
In his letter outlining his position on the contest for authentic National Chairman of the party between Umeh and Okwu, the AGF stated: “I have examined the decision of High Court of Anambra State in Suit No. A/126/2013: Onwudinjo Vs Maxi Okwu & ors and that of the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. A/126/2013, Onwudinjo V Maxi Okwu & ors, which validated the national convention of APGA, held on April 8, 2013. I have also examined the decision of the Federal High Court in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/563- Chief Maxi Okwu & Ors V. Chief Victor Umeh & Ors, which invalidated the position of Chief Victor Umeh as National Chairman of APGA. I wish to observe that though the case is currently on appeal, no valid order of stay of execution exists”. I am therefore of the respectful view that on the basis of the above decisions, Chief Maxi Okwu should be recognized as the National Chairman of APGA…”
Ordinarily, the fact that the National Convention of the party held on April 8, 2013 was done according to the APGA constitution should have settled the matter if those involved in the leadership squabbles have the interest of the party at heart. But it is perplexing that one of the contestants was quoted as telling Chief Chris Uche, the National Vice Chairman, (South) that unless he was national chairman, he would see to the demise of APGA. May be he owns the party but the Abuja Federal High Court judgment which the AGF referred to actually underscored the point that Chief Umeh and Sani Shinkafi had over stayed their tenure as national Chairman and Secretary respectively. While the court held that Umeh’s tenure expired in December 2010, the Court also discovered that his attempt to railroad himself back to power through an affirmation congress, which was actually convoked to endorse President Goodluck Jonathan for the presidency; violates the APGA constitution. Again, the Abuja High Court noted that Shinkafi has exceeded the maximum two terms in office of eight years allowed by the party’s constitution. It could be seen from the foregoing that the inability of the APGA leaders to respect the constitution of their party contributes to the prolonged power tussle.
The current squabble over who is the authentic candidate of the APGA could also be traced to impunity and disregard for the party’s constitution. It is a matter better left for the courts to decide whether the fact that his tenure had elapsed by December 2010, makes Umeh’s decision to sign Obiano’s nomination forms invalid. But Dr. Obidigbo, after raising objections to the screening and nomination of Obiano by Umeh’s three-man panel, went ahead to win the primaries conducted by the authentic APGA led by Maxi Okwu. However, though Umeh did not refer to any section of the APGA constitution, he contends that the Constitution confers on APGA national chairman the power to erect a screening and appeal panel. Could it be that Umeh was seeing himself as the alter-ego of the APGA or that he resents the route to due process and rule of law? May be it is that disposition that makes Umeh to plead that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate in the internal affairs of a political party. But it is expected that when the constitution of an organization is at issue, the court could step in to interpret. The intervention of the AGF could be appreciated from that perspective.
Who knows, the decision of Federal High Court, Awka to grant a motion ex parte for the  INEC to accept the names of Obiano and Obidigbo pending the determination of who emerged in consonance with the APGA Constitution, must have been informed by the reasons adduced by the nation’s chief law officer, Mr. Mohammed Adoke, the AGF. The place of the court in the practice of genuine democracy cannot be overemphasized. But in a nation where money rules, only an upright judiciary can make sure that impunity or overriding of the law do not go without censure. 
Nwaobosi writes from Umuota, Obosi Idemmili LGA, Anambra State.