APC
National Legal Adviser, Babatunde Reacts to Purported Formation of Reformed APC
Background:
Two days ago, on July 4, 2018, we witnessed a Press
Conference by one Mr. Buba Galadima speaking allegedly on behalf of a group of
politicians who claim to be of our Party the All Progressives Congress (APC).
His very act (as we will show later in this address) taken together with the
content of his Press Release were reminiscent of the televised military address
issued after a successful execution of a Coup De Tat which Nigerians had become
used to before the advent of this sustained democratic experience. The only
difference being that Mr. Galadima was gabbed in civilian attire.
Furthermore, other persons purporting to be members
of this group have gone to town seeking to validate this unruly conduct and
these have necessitated the APC as the ruling party responsible for the
protection of our budding democracy to clarify on the legal import of the
action of this group as well as confirm to our teeming supporters across the
country that this situation is well within our control and assure all that the
rule of law must take its natural course in this matter.
What
Are The Issues At Stake?
Ladies and Gentlemen, the sum total of Mr.
Galadima’s Press Release can be captured under 3 (Three) major issues and we
will address each of them subsequently;
a. That the Party’s convention was improperly
conducted by the Convention Chairman as Consensus candidates were only
subjected to a ‘yes’ vote in alleged contravention of Article 20 of the APC
Constitution.
b. That a group of delegates have come together 10 (Ten)
days after the successful conduct of the APC convention to, in their words,
‘take control and give legitimacy’ to APC now to be known as Reformed APC
(‘R-APC).
c. That R-APC whose congresses and convention date
is yet to be disclosed already has the full complement of national executives,
national working committee, state executives and local government officials in
all 774 local government areas across the country.
(a).On the first issue regarding the convention of
APC held on June 23, 2018 let me make it clear that it was the culmination of a
series of congresses conducted in over 166,000 wards across this country and
all the 36 states including the Federal Capital Territory which produced the
delegates. The question of elections within the APC is covered by Article 20 of
the APC Constitution. Specifically, Section 20 (1) provides that;
‘All Party posts prescribed or implied by this
constitution shall be filled by democratically conducted elections at the
respective National Convention or Congress subject, where possible to
consensus, Provided that where a candidate has emerged by consensus for an elective
position, a vote of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ by ballot or voice shall be called to ensure
that it was not an imposition which could breed discontent and crisis’.
A clear reading of this provision shows that
delegates may consent to a single candidate; however that consent must be
validated/re-affirmed at the convention. This was exactly the case at the
convention where candidates who emerged based on consensus had their elections
validated and affirmed by voice votes of the delegates. This much was admitted
by Galadima in his civilian take-over speech. It is therefore worrisome that he
goes ahead to suggest that the affirmation process was flawed because only a
‘yes’ question was put to the delegates and not a ‘yes’ and ‘no’ question.
In any case, considering that this question
condescends on the interpretation of a legal document, I would have expected
Galadima and his gang to consult a lawyer who should have told them that the
use of the word ‘or’ in a legal document connotes that it is disjunctive. So a
party is at liberty to choose between two options and exercising only one of
both options would amount to compliance with the provisions contained in such a
document. This was the decision of the Court in the case of Nwaogwugu v.
President F.R.N. (2007) All FWLR (Pt. 358) 1151 at 1171 Paras G-H, where the
Court held as follows:
“The use of the word “or” in a statute connotes
disjunctive participle used to express an alternative or to give a choice of
one among two or more things. The word always bears a disjunctive meaning in an
enactment. It separates the provision preceding it from the provision coming
after it. Its role is to show that the other provisions in which it is
appearing are distinct and separate one from the other...”
From the above, it is clear that the convention
chairman only had to ask a ‘yes’ (ie affirmation) question or a ‘no’ (i.e a
dissent) question but certainly not a ‘yes’ and ‘no’ question. For Mr. Galadima
to seek to threaten our democracy based on his misconceived interpretation of
the word ‘or’ is a testament to his desperation and sense of impunity. Overall,
were the mischief, spirit and intendment of the provision of Article 20 not
complied with?
One would have expected a law-abiding person who is
confused about the law or disenchanted with a process to approach the
appropriate judicial authorities to seek redress instead of resorting to
self-help and embarking on criminal acts in the name of being aggrieved.
(b).On the second issue raised above which is the
claim by the Mr. Galadima that APC delegates have decided to take control and
given legitimacy to APC as well as formed the Reformed APC, this only reveals
the extent of disregard for our laws and constituted authorities by this group.
You have to ask them at what point did they conduct congresses to elect
delegates to their Political Party? Or was it the same delegates who conducted
themselves in an orderly manner at the APC convention of June 23, 2018 that
this group speaks of 10 days after? Does this group realize that political
parties are not conjured into existence by wishful thinking but by careful
compliance with the cumbersome process of registration laid out in section 78
of the Electoral Act 2010? There is no provision for civilian coups in the
constitution of APC and any suggestion that their action was carried out in
consonance with the APC constitution is as misconceived as it is mischievous.
(c).On the third point of the R-APC electing
executives across the country, the question to ask this group that claims to be
aggrieved because of an alleged breach of a provision in the APC constitution
requiring ‘yes’ and ‘no’ voice vote is, where did they hold their own
convention? Is it not a requirement of the same APC constitution that positions
must be subjected to election either democratically of through consensus? Were
the so called executives of this new contraption elected by consensus or by
contestation? Have they ever heard of or read the provisions of Section 85 of
the Electoral Act? Have they seen the Guidelines for the Registration of New
Political Parties 2014? Where officials of the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) at their imaginary congress? These are questions that speak
to the real intent of this group which is to perpetuate impunity, breach public
peace by causing political pandemonium and reap benefits from the vandalization
of our democratic process. But APC will not allow that.
Consequences
of Their Action:
Some of the immediate consequences of the action of
Mr. Galadima is that he and his gang (unless those who have disassociated
themselves from his Press Release) have committed several criminal infractions
as well as given rise to civil injury against the APC which include;
1. Impersonation:
Mr. Galadima in his Press Release copiously referred
to himself as the substantive Chairman of R-APC a variant of APC whilst he
knows full well that there is indeed no such political party in Nigeria. Also,
he also suggests that he is the substantive Chairman of APC even though he
knows that Com. Adams Oshiomole is indeed the party Chairman and Mr. Galadima
never contested for Chairmanship at the just concluded convention of the APC.
In the circumstance, Mr. Galadima has committed the offence of Personation as
defined and punishable under Section 484 of the Criminal Code and the
authorities will be requested to do their work in bringing him to
account.
2.
Fraudulent Misrepresentation:
To the extent that Mr. Galadima continues to
perpetuate a falsehood knowing such falsehood of him forming a Political Party
overnight and being Chairman either of same party or APC indeed to be untrue
yet persists for the purpose of gaining either pecuniary or other benefits, he
is guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation. In Ikechukwu Ikpa vs. The State
(2018) 4 NWLR Part 1069 Page 175 – 240, the Supreme Court defines Fraudulent
Misrepresentation to mean;
‘a false statement that is known to be false or is
made recklessly without knowing or caring whether it is true or false and that
is intended to induce a party to detrimentally rely on it.’
In this case, Mr. Galadima knowingly made his false
statement with the clear intention of deceiving Nigerians to abandon the APC
and instead follow him and his gang.
3.
Conduct Likely To Breach Public Peace:
Without a doubt, the declaration of Mr. Galadima if
left unchecked is capable of leading to the public nuisance and a breach of
peace across Country. Our loyal members are already agitated by the incendiary
action of this group which runs counter to the beliefs, principles and creed of
the APC.
4.
Breach of Trademark and Infringement of Copy Right:
This for us is one of the key points of this
address. We trust relevant authorities to deal with the criminal conducts of
this group. However as it touches on our brand we are forced to quickly take
steps to protect it from being subjected to erosion by the thoughtless actions
of this group.
As Nigerians are aware, the coinage APC is both a
mark and a copy right capable of being protected under the common law
principles of passing off as well as under the extant provisions of the
Copyright’s Act. Nigerians can only imagine what it would be like if we were to
wake up one morning to a bank claiming to the Reformed First Bank Plc or a
Construction company claiming to be the Reformed Julius Berger Plc formed by a
group of its directors allegedly because they disagree with certain decisions
taken at the board meeting! This will be viewed as a blatant assault on the
brand for which both civil and criminal recourse can be sought.
So is it in this case that APC is a brand owned by
its teeming members who have invested the National Executive Committee and
other organs of the party with the power to protect this brand from abuse and
erosion. We practice a multi-party democratic system and therefore cannot stop
Mr. Galadima from forming his own political party if he so desires. However, he
will not be allowed to do so using the APC brand. For the infringement so far
committed by Mr. Galadima and the odium he has brought upon the APC brand we
will be seeking civil redress against his person and that of his group. With
respect to the criminal aspect of his conduct, we will be notifying the
appropriate authorities to do the needful.
Fellow Nigerians, in 2015, we witnessed a seismic
event where for the first time in our political history an opposition party
defeated an incumbent. We opened our arms to work with all Nigerians because we
believe in the inherent goodness of all Nigerians. However, we have had to
battle with the manifest desperation of a few overlords who consider every
segment of Nigeria their personal property. The government of President
Muhammad Buhari and the leadership of our great party are committed to winning
the battle for the soul of Nigeria, securing it from further pillaging by these
rent seekers and deliver the dividends of democracy to all Nigerians without
regards for tribe, religion and social status.
This requires us to cleanse our political process of
people who have become accustomed to brigandage and being unruly. Politics and
leadership are enterprises that should summon the best in us not expose the
worst in us. Let those who are in doubt hear this, APC under the current
leadership will work with the leadership of President Muhammad Buhari to
sanitize our political space and we will start with Mr. Galadima and his
group to show that there is no room today for the impunity of old.
Babatunde
OGALA, Esq
National
Legal Adviser;
All
Progressives Congress (APC)
No comments:
Post a Comment