After weeks of threats and ultimately filing a suit against Governor Bello Matawalle for defecting from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress, the ruling party, last week,dismissed what it described as baseless and illogical arguments on the part of the opposition party. Davidson Iriekpen writes
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has finally made good its threats to remove the Zamfara State Governor, Bello Muhammad Matawalle, for defecting from the party to the All Progressives Congress (APC). In a suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, the party prayed the court to sack Matawalle.
In the suit filed in the names of two of its members from Zamfara State, Sani Kaura Ahmed and Abubakar Muhammed, the plaintiffs averred that, in view of an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court to the effect that the APC had no candidates in the 2019 governorship election in Zamfara State, having not conducted valid primaries, it would be unlawful for Matawalle to retain his offices while defecting from the PDP to the APC and thereby transfering PDP’s victory to the APC. They urged the court to, among others, declare that Matawalle and Gusau must resign from their offices to allow INEC conduct a fresh election within three months for the PDP to replace them.
When the case came up last Tuesday, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN), moved an ex parte motion for an order “granting leave to the plaintiffs/applicants to serve the motion on notice seeking leave to amend hearing notices and all other processes on the first and second defendants by substituted means, to wit: pasting same at the Zamfara State liaison office at 6/7 Sangha Street, off Mississippi Street, Maitama District, Abuja, or leaving it with any adult person in that office”.
In a ruling, Justice Inyang Ekwo granted the prayer contained in the motion and ordered the plaintiffs to effect service within three days and adjourned till July 16.
In a supporting affidavit, Ahmed said he suffered along with other PDP members in Zamfara State and that Matawalle’s defection deprived them of the efforts they put into ensuring the party’s victory in the election. He added that it would amount to injustice against him and other members of the PDP in the state if Matawalle, being beneficiaries of the Supreme Court judgment, was allowed to defect to the APC without relinquishing their current offices.
Matawalle, penultimate week, formally defected from the PDP to the APC. As it is usually the case, the governor took with him to the ruling party, some members of the state and federal legislators. This did not go down well with the PDP, which threatened to challenge the defection in court.
Matawalle, who came a distant second in the March 2019 general election was declared governor on May 24, 2019, after the Supreme Court disqualified all the APC candidates over the failure of the APC to conduct valid primaries.
The apex court specifically held that APC having not conducted valid primaries, in the face of the law, did not participate in the 2019 elections where it swept the presidential, governorship and all the federal and state legislative seats, beating PDP candidates to a distant second position.
It further ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to cancel the votes secured by the APC in all the elections and decide the new winners from the remaining valid votes.
PDP spokesman, Kola Ologbodiyan, specifically stated that the Supreme Court judgment upon which Matawalle assumed office was clear and unambiguous that it is party that contests election in Nigeria and not the candidate.
His words: “No law allows him to cross over to any other party with the governorship mandate statutorily given to the PDP through the ballot box, as already established by the provision of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the standing judgment of the Supreme Court.
“A combined reading of Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution as the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in Faleke v. INEC (2016) is clear in holding that it is the political party that stands for election, that votes scored in election belong to the political party and that the candidate nominated to contest at an election by his party acts only as the agent of his party.
But Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Mr. Festus Keyamo, felt that the PDP was too fast in thinking that it has a water-tight case against Matawalle and the APC. He added that the opposition political party was pursuing illogical, baseless and mischievous arguments without any constitutional backing.
Keyamo faulted PDP’s interpretation of Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution as amended in the case of Faleke vs INEC, saying Matawalle’s defection would not cost him the governorship seat.
“Unfortunately, for the PDP, the Supreme Court decision in Faleke v. INEC does not relate to the consequence of the defection of a governor from one political party to the other. A more apt instance will be the Atiku Abubakar scenario wherein Atiku Abubakar as Vice President, elected under the PDP, defected to the then Action Congress. President Olusegun Obasanjo attempted to declare his office vacant in circumstances similar to the Zamfara scenario and the dispute ended in Court,” he said.
The minister further explained that under the 1999 Constitution, provisions relating to removal of the president/vice president are replicated with respect to governors/deputy governors. Additionally, Keyamo said Section 221 of the 1999 constitution did not avail the PDP any protection and was not remotely applicable to the present situation in Zamfara State.
He added that Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution merely dealt with the prohibition of political activities by associations other than political parties and said the attempt by the PDP to import the provisions of section 68 of the 1999 constitution into section 221 of the 1999 constitution smacked of mischief.
“The position of the Supreme Court was reported as Attorney General of the Federation V. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (part 1041) 1. At page 124 of the report, Justice Walter Onnoghen set down the position thus: ‘There is nowhere in the 1999 Constitution, where it is stated that the President or Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be removed or is removable from that office if he defects from the political party on whose platform he was elected to that office and joins another political party’.
“If the intent of the draftsmen was to prohibit the defection of governors to other political parties, it would have been so expressly stated like in the case of lawmakers. The provisions of the 1999 Constitution are very clear on the grounds for the removal of an Executive Governor of a state from office and defection to another political party is not one of such grounds.
One interesting point the Supreme Court also made in the Atiku Abubakar case, which must have been lost on the PDP was that once a candidate is elected as President or Vice-President (in this case, a Governor) he automatically drops the ticket upon which he/she rode to power and becomes a President or Vice-President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and not of that political party. The ticket is only a VEHICLE to get elected. Once elected, the Governor drops that party ticket and becomes a free agent for everyone in that state. He is therefore free to associate (and decamp) as he likes to any political party,” he said.
But the PDP fired back at Keyamo over his legal opinion, saying he ended up exposing his poor knowledge of the application of the law by stating that the judgment could not apply in a case of defection of a governor from the party on which platform he was elected to another, particularly, a party that did not even participate in the election.
“We refer Keyamo to the definite pronouncement of the Supreme Court in that case, to the effect that it is the political party that stands for election, that votes scored in election belong to the political party and that the candidate nominated to contest at an election by his party acts only as the ‘agent’ of his party. The incontrovertible applicative import of that judgment is that the votes upon which Bello Matallawe assumed office as the governor of Zamfara State belong to the PDP and they are not transferable to the APC, which did not sponsor candidates for that election as required by Section 221 of the Constitution.
“On Keyamo’s claim that once elected, the governor drops that party ticket and becomes free even to decamp to any other political party, we ask if that be the case under the law, how come Mukhtar Shehu Idris of the APC, who was already declared as elected governor of Zamfara State, had to lose the position immediately the Supreme Court decided that the votes cast for APC in that election cannot count?
“Perhaps Kayamo needs be reminded that there is no position of independent candidacy in Nigeria,which is why it is the logos of political parties and not names of candidates that are imprinted on the ballot papers if he had ever participated in elections and voted before.”
Definitely, the Matawalle matter is going to be a long haul between the two parties and until the Supreme Court expeditiously settles the case, the jury is still out and remain fingers crossed.
