In the March 11, 2019 piece on “APC, Amosun, Okorocha and party discipline,” I focused on the deliberate design by governors, and powerful chieftains of the All Progressives Congress (APC) not to adhere to and obey the party’s rules and regulations.
In a way, the instant material is an extension of that article, as the processes for conducting and managing elections, like observing the rules and regulations, also have their roots in the constitution of the party.
The non-observance of international best practices by members has bred indiscipline and impunity in the APC, resulting in factionalisation in many state chapters, and making an otherwise shoo-in 2019 general election hard-fought for the party.
Due to internal division, the APC lost Imo and Oyo states to the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during the March 9 governorship poll, and only a “miracle” can retain Adamawa and Bauchi and Kano states in its fold, from the concluding “inconclusive elections” in those states.
Although it gained three opposition states of Gombe, Kwara and Sokoto in the presidential poll of February 23, the APC lost six of its controlling states of Adamawa, Edo, Imo, Ondo, Oyo and Plateau to the PDP.
Partisan skirmishes since APC’s enthronement in 2015, and the outcome of its May 2018 congresses prompted a 2017 and 2018 exodus of many of its prominent members, including former Vice President and candidate of the PDP, Atiku Abubakar; National Assembly lawmakers, led by the heads of the two Chambers, and three state governors of Benue, Kwara and Sokoto.
The party was yet to recover from that mass defection when the August 2018 primaries stoked more decamping, and in-house sabotage of its fortunes during the two-part 2019 election.
Thus, the happenings from the congresses and primaries call for an urgent review of the APC constitution, in order to streamline procedures for choosing candidates for party and elective positions.
The extant constitution leaves too much space for the party bigwigs to manipulate the system to their advantage, and disadvantage of those in their “black books,” and ordinary members of the party.
Article 20 of the constitution states that all party posts, prescribed or implied, “shall be filled by democratically-conducted elections at the respective National Convention or Congress subject, where possible, to consensus.”
Except for councilorship, which is by direct primary election, other positions, including Local Government Council/Area Council Chairman, State House of Assembly, House of Representatives, Senate, Governor and President “shall be through direct or indirect primary election to be conducted at the appropriate level.”
Besides, the constitution gives the the National Working Committee (NWC), subject to the approval of the National Executive Committee (NEC), the power to “make rules and regulations for the nomination of candidates through primary elections.”
And here lies the big problem for the APC: adopting three options – consensus, indirect or direct primary election – for the nomination of candidates. Too much wiggle room for self-mischief!
Remarkably, the governors, and chieftains are quick to adopt “consensus” as the process for choosing candidates. Where the option fails, as it does most times, they go for the indirect process that can also be influenced by the major powers in the party.
Hardly do these political heavyweights go for the direct process, which gives the “disadvantaged,” and ordinary members of the party a voice in the choice of candidates. That’s why in 2018, the Adams Oshiomhole-led NWC of the APC tabled its adoption as the only process for elections henceforth.
But the option met with resistance from majority of the APC governors, and only got approval of the NEC for the presidential primary poll that returned over 14 million votes for the nomination for re-election bid of President Muhammadu Buhari.
Attempts by the NWC to enforce direct primaries in the states aggravated the division in the party going into the February 23 and March 9 elections. In many states controlled by the APC, incumbent or past governors, after failing to get endorsement for “consensus,” grudgingly adopted the indirect primaries to “achieve” nomination for their “anointed/preferred” candidates.
In some instances, the governors circumvented the supervision of the primaries by the NWC, and used the State Working Committee (SWC) to “rubber-stamp” their choice candidates.
Consequently, many state chapters held parallel primaries, with the blessing of the NWC, which, in line with its guidelines, sent monitors from the APC headquarters in Abuja for the exercises.
Hence, more than one candidate “claimed” the governorship ticket of the party in states like Abia, Cross River, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo, Ogun, Rivers and Taraba, and the ensuing court orders, even on the eve of the elections, that affirmed the “actual” candidates of the party. (Owing to non-compliance with the rules, the courts barred Rivers APC from fielding candidates for the 2019 election.)
Where the NWC was able to ensure some semblance of a level-playing field that favoured the “disadvantaged” candidates over the “anointed/preferred” candidates, the governors sabotaged the APC by sponsoring their proxies on other political platforms.
Sitting APC governors in Ogun, Imo and Ondo chapters sponsored candidates in the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and Action Alliance (AA) against the candidates fielded by their own party.
Squabbles are part and parcel of politics, but the intra-party crises that bedeviled the APC in the run-up to the 2019 election were induced by aggrieved members from the congress and primary polls to pick candidates for party positions and elective offices.
In a matter of months, the party will embark on fresh congresses and primaries in Kogi and Bayelsa, to choose its respective governorship candidate, and it may yet be a repeat of the 2018 scenarios if it failed to streamline the primary process.
As a “stitch in time,” the APC should convene its NEC meeting, and adopt the direct election, be it for congress or primary, so as to strip the party strongmen of the “power” to easily manipulate the process to favour themselves or their “cronies” in the two elections.
And going into 2023, and in future balloting, let there be no gamble with options – consensus, indirect and direct election – in the choice of its candidates. It should settle for a permanent “direct election” that involves all party members, who, as in the general election, should wield the ultimate power in the nomination process.
* Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.