Connect with us

Politics

Party management, not means of livelihood – Kekemeke

Published

on

Despite the ‘suspension’ slammed on him by some members of the Ondo State Working Committee of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Hon. Duerimini Isaacs Kekemeke insists that he is the authentic chairman of the party. He speaks in this interview with Babatope Okeowo on the crisis rocking the party, among other issues

 

What is your position in Ondo State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC)?
I am the chairman of APC in Ondo State. As a matter of fact, I am the only elected officer of the party in the state, there was a congress and that congress elected me and I defeated my incumbent deputy. But because everybody wanted to build, I agreed that he should become my deputy even when he lost to me and then we put all the other structures together.

But some people claimed to have suspended you and appointed the person you defeated as the acting chairman?
Well, it is ironic and laughable. This is so because if you recall, immediately after my election, I decided that all the interest groups must be put together and we met nothing on ground, it was a new party and I was the first chairman to be elected so to say and some of the interests that I defeated were never happy with me. They were also not happy with the way I ran the party because we were going to run the party differently to make it a winnable platform to make sure that elections were the focus and quite a number of people didn’t think so.
They thought that a party could serve as means of livelihood, a means of meeting their basic needs. I didn’t think so and I also don’t think that it is right for us to go cap in hand begging all the time to ask for money and that if we were going to get any support at all, it should be for the work of the party and to make sure that we created a credible platform.
There were a number of times we were not happy that money wasn’t available for sharing, so these people were tempted not once to remove me, and you will remember that at a time the Publicity Secretary said he had removed me. At another time, an ex officio member then, who is now a commissioner, declared himself chairman. They have always done this, so I think this is one of those forms and I am sure they will soon get to know.

But they claimed to have a letter from the National Chairman of the party, proclaiming Engr. Ade Adetimehin as chairman of the party in the state?
I also saw the letter in the social media; I have referred to that letter in many occasions and in many fora as a Black Market letter. The letter speaks for itself. I was excited when I read the letter because before it came, they had said I have been removed, they had been saying that Adetimehin was substantive chairman and then suddenly a letter came that said ‘no you are not chairman, you are acting chairman.’ For me, if they were sober people, they would look critically at that letter and say ‘all the while you have been claiming that you are chairman, you were not.’
The letter says the chairman has approved pending the time the National Working Committee (NWC) will meet, but I said so the NWC and the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party to which I belong to have not even met and I read through and it said pending the time the NWC meets on the complains against the state chairman. There is a state chairman, and thirdly and most fundamentally, there is nowhere in the provisions of the APC Constitution, where power is donated to the national chairman to act as a sole authority for removing and appointing officers for the party.

If you are the chairman, why are you not in the party’s secretariat?
You will recall that on one or two occasions, people had gone into that secretariat and illegally occupied it and we had flushed them out. That was when there was a job to be done. There was a serious job to be done; elections were coming and I needed to deliver, so we flushed them out and did what we had to do. There is a government both at the national and state level that our efforts have successfully put in place.
I have been approached many times by people to go flush them out, but I have decided to be cautious. I think it is better for me to stay away than to go there, provoke a fight or a quarrel and get limbs, heads, legs and eyes broken. What do I need it for? It happened in Bayelsa and somebody was killed, would I like to do that? No! Secondly, I have a second address, but most of the people who go to that secretariat probably don’t have anywhere to go.
I started the party in my chambers here is my house, I could do some of those things from wherever I like, so I don’t want my name to be dragged into breaking anybody’s limb or getting people injured or getting people shot. I am a lawyer, and in any case, you don’t expect me to do what some people will do.

Who between you and Adetimehin attends meetings of the party at the national?
I have been attending national meetings until the last one when they started cooking this Black Market letter. I can tell you that Adetimehin was not allowed to attend any of the meetings.

Is there any attempt by Governor Rotimi Akeredolu to bring the warring factions together?
Let me say this; the governor is our governor, he is our party’s governor and he is my senior at the Bar. He is also my predecessor in office as Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice. I think we have a good personal relationship, I don’t think we have any personal thing against each other, but basically I don’t think that the governor has forgiven me or a great number of members of the party for our disposition to him prior to his becoming governor.
But when he won, I did write to him to congratulate him on behalf of the party and to tell him that he should understand that he is governor of not only members of the party but the entire State irrespective of political inclination. I told him that he should forget about the past and put all of us together for the good of our party and the state. I thought that was the best I could offer him given that I was sidelined during the inauguration but it didn’t quite make too much meaning to me. But prior to the inauguration, he had called me to say let us go to Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to obtain his Certificate of Return and we were there together.
He also invited me to be part of the handover ceremony and I was there. But thereafter, things changed at the inauguration and the constitution of inauguration committees. We were sidelined, but we didn’t think it as anything to howl about or to make noise about and thereafter it was clear that he didn’t want to work with me. Of course, I knew he didn’t want to work with me when I stumbled on a letter addressed to him by some other party people not members of APC, and he, in his own handwriting minuted it to the deputy chairman for action.

But the allegation is that you didn’t work for the party during the election. They said you worked for the Alliance for Democracy (AD) candidate, Chief Olusola Oke…
That is one of the funny traits in this party that we tried to correct overtime. When you talk about a party’s victory, there was work done; most of the time work done to make sure that you plant the party, you put the party on ground, you build the structures of the party, you expand the party, elections are not won on Election Day. You put structures for the party, so who did it? Who put all the structures? Who built the party? Who supplied all the agents? Who supplied all the voters register and made copies available to every unit for effective monitoring? Who gave that coordinating effort to provide it?
I am sure that the people in my unit, in my ward, in my local government won’t say it because they know most of the people who are saying that, have nothing to say. I haven’t heard anyone say it to me, so it’s some insanity for anyone to say that I abandoned the party that I laboured alongside others to build; the party that I worked for two weeks after my wife’s death. I didn’t work for AD, I have no need of it. If I want to work for AD, I work for AD, will anyone flog me?

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Politics

Electoral Act: Twists and turns of amendment

Published

on

CHUKWU DAVID reports on the recent amendment to the 2010 Electoral Act by the National Assembly, reordering the sequence of elections, which triggered uproar in the Senate and caused a division among members of the upper legislative chamber

As the 2019 general elections approach, battle for self-preservation and survival has already begun within the nation’s political space. Politicians at all levels have started making their calculations and going into latent and sometimes manifest alignment and realignment, with the polity gradually getting charged as well as heated up. In the National Assembly, a lot of intrigues and horse-trading are obviously going on among members.

 

 

This betrays the serious apprehension in the camps of the lawmakers, resulting in the various disquiet tendencies manifesting in the way they go about their legislative business in some critical issues likely to affect their political future.

 

The current brouhaha in the Senate over the amendment to the 2010 Electoral Act, where the lawmakers had to reorder the sequence of elections, contrary to the original arrangement of the nation’s electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), is a reflection of the fact that the lawmakers have started drawing the battle line and building citadels of defence against incursions of some elements in the presidency, who might be plotting to frustrate their return to the legislature in 2019.

 

Apparently, the foot soldiers of President Muhammadu Buhari in the Senate are already crying out, that the sudden decision of the two chambers of the National Assembly to reorder the sequence of elections in the Electoral Act, was targeted at the President to frustrate his re-election bid, while at the same time trying to fortify their chances of returning to the hallowed chambers in 2019.

 

 

From the politicking currently going on between the National Assembly and the presidency, there is no doubt that the lawmakers are afraid that if presidential election holds first and Buhari emerges, he might use his power to ensure that those who are his perceived enemies in the present Assembly do not win their elections back to the apex parliament.

 

Conversely, there are also indications that Buhari and his supporters in the National Assembly are apprehensive that, holding the presidential election last would put him (Buhari) at a difficult position, where he might lose election particularly as there is an outcry across the country over the state of the nation under his leadership and watch.

 

With the current furore in the Senate on the amendment to the Electoral Act, there are possibilities that President Buhari may decide to withhold assent to the Bill when transmitted to him.

 

If this happens, then the National Assembly leadership will face the serious hurdle of getting the constitutional requirement of two-thirds majority to override his veto, which may be extremely hard to achieve because of the immense ethno-religious influences on Nigerian politics.

 

The pro-Buhari senators have also threatened to go to court to ensure that the controversial reordering of election sequence does not become law.

 

This development will one way or another definitely diminish the strength of the All Progressives Congress (APC) before and during the 2019 general elections.

 

This is because, if not quickly resolved, it might provoke some irreconcilable acrimony among the members of the party in the build up to 2019.

 

This will also give the opposition especially the Peoples  Democratic Party (PDP), some level of advantage in 2019 elections, particularly if the stakeholders in PDP cash in on the various crises rocking the APC, and put their house in order before and during the elections.

 

Genesis of the disagreement

 

The Senate was thrown into a serious turmoil last week Wednesday over the consideration and what some senators described as a controversial adoption of the Conference Report of its Committee on Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Act Amendment Bill.

 

The crisis erupted between those considered to be pro- Buhari senators and others who are supposedly not supporting his re-election bid. The two factions tested their strengths to some extent during the exercise, which later resulted in desperate press briefings by the opposing political blocks.

 

The genesis of the imbroglio was the report of the Conference Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives, which approved the reordering of the sequence of elections, thereby invalidating what INEC had arranged and sent to public domain through the time table it earlier released on the 2019 general elections.

 

The House of Representatives committee on Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, had in its amendment to the 2010 Electoral Act, included Section 25(1) into the Act by reordering the sequence of the elections to start with the National Assembly, followed by governorship and state Assembly elections before the presidential election, which is now to come last if the proposal eventually becomes law.

 

The Chairman of the Conference Committee and Chairman, Senate Committee on INEC, Senator Suleiman Nazif, who presented the report for consideration, explained that the Conference Committee harmonised some differences in the two versions of the bill as passed by both chambers as well as adopted the new agreed positions.

 

“The committee met and deliberated on the two versions of the bill. After exhaustive deliberations, the committee noticed seven areas of differences in section 36 (3), 49(2), 53(2), 63(4), 78(4),” he said. Nazif further explained that the committee, in considering the House version in sections 25(1) and 8 (9A, a and b) dealing with sequence of elections and political parties’ primaries, unanimously adopted the provisions in its entirety to ensure orderliness.

 

Pro Buhari senators rattled

 

According to the rule of the apex Chamber, the conference report ought to have been subjected to debate on the floor, to enable senators who are not members of the committee to make contributions, especially in the areas that were not part of the Senate version but the President of the Senate, Dr. Bukola Saraki, put motion for the adoption of the report straight for voice votes.

 

Tension further heightened when it appeared as if at the voice votes, those who shouted nay were louder than those who shouted ayes, and yet Saraki in his ruling said the ayes carried the day. Angered by this development, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege (APC, Delta Central) raised a point of order to call for division, but was overruled by Saraki.

 

Omo-Agege, in his point of order, argued that the committee had no power to reorder the sequence of elections, stating that it was an attempt to usurp the constitutional powers of INEC and declaring the action unconstitutional, null and void and should be revered by the National Assembly.

 

He alleged that it was only 36 out of the 360 members of the House of Representatives were present in the Green Chamber the day the amendment to the Electoral Act was carried out there, while the Senate did not form a quorum on the day it was passed in the Red Chamber.

 

His words: “The Electoral Act that is being amended today, is a product of well considered research by the INEC committee in the Senate; it went through full deliberation on the floor, and it was passed.

 

“36 people in the House of Representatives cannot determine the faith and the destiny of 360 people in the House, which is now carried over in the of 109. Yes, if a conference committee is set up to reconcile the differences, the least we are owed is for this amendment to section 25 to be deliberated.”

 

Painful enough to the Buhari supporters, all the struggle put forward by Senator Omo-Agege to attract Saraki’s attention and persuade him to yield to his argument ended as futile efforts because the President of the Senate could not reverse his already made up position.

 

In another spirited effort to nullify the passage of the report, Senator Kabiru Gaya (APC, Kano South) rose through another point of order to argue that it was against the Senate rules for a conference committee report to be adopted without being debated at the committee of the whole.

 

Gaya’s argument was however, knocked off by Saraki, who referred him to rule 53(6) of the Senate standing orders, which prevents the apex legislative chamber from revisiting any matter that had been ruled upon.

 

“Distinguished colleagues, I’m just entertaining all these points of order being raised over the just passed 2010 Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill for the sake of understanding ourselves better on an issue, which is of national and not selfish interest,” he said.

 

Obviously not satisfied with the explanation, another senator, Abdullahi Adamu (APC, Nasarawa), disrupted the proceedings further with another point of order, under which he argued that the sequence of elections included in the Act was illegal.

 

According to him, section 76 of the 1999 Constitution vests the power to organise, conduct and fix dates for elections in INEC, which in spirit, also includes order of elections as earlier announced by the electoral body.

 

But rather than providing solution to the disagreement, the argument offended Saraki, who declared that section 25(1) of the Electoral Act, which deals with sequence of elections has nothing to do with organising, conducting and fixing dates for elections. Just as he did to other speakers, who were antagonistic to the adoption of the report, the President of the Senate ruled him out of order and called on the Senate Leader, Ahmad Lawan (APC, Yobe North), to proceed with the next item on the order paper.

 

Pro Buhari senators walk of plenary

 

The pro Buhari senators felt humiliated by Saraki’s ruling, and in a prompt reactionary move, Adamu and nine other senators immediately stormed out of the chamber to the Senate’s press centre, where they briefed journalists, expressing their grievances and total opposition to the action of the President of the Senate in midwifing the adoption of the report in a manner they said lacked due process.

 

The senators who walked out of the chamber included Abdullahi Yahaya (APC, Kebbi North), Ibrahim Kurfi (APC, Katsina Central), Abu Ibrahim (APC, Katsina South), Abdullahi Gumel (APC, Jigawa North), Binta Masi Garba (APC, Adamawa North), Ali Wakili (APC, Bauchi South), Andrew Uchendu (APC, River East) and Benjamin Uwajumogu (APC, Imo North).

 

 

They all took turns to speak against the adoption of the controversial report, declaring it as a constitutional breach, which would not see the light of the day since according to them, it was targeted against President Buhari. Senator Adamu, who led the group said that they already had 59 signatures of senators against the insertion section 25(1) into the Electoral Act.

 

However, the protesting lawmakers did not provide proof that the group actually secured 59 senators on its side because they were unable to produce a signed list of the claimed number of supporters.

 

“Though we are 10 here now, we can assure you that as at this morning, not less than 59 senators have expressed their opposition to the illegal sequence of elections included in the Act. Perhaps that was the reason why the Senate president refused to follow the due process when report on the Act was to be adopted in the Senate.

 

 

“Section 25(1) of the Act reordering the sequence of elections from the one earlier released by INEC last year is a law targeted at an individual which to us is totally in bad faith and will not be allowed to stand,” he said.

 

At this point, Senator Omo-Agege, who is a lawyer by training, boasted that he won his election in 2015 on the platform of the Labour Party and not APC, but that as a senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, it would be wrong for him to keep quiet on the basis of partisan interest, when wrong things were being done by politicians who swore to uphold and defend the constitution of the land, and by extension, the people.

 

The senators also claimed that many members of the Conference Committee, which first adopted the contentious insertion, did not sign the document including the chairmen of the INEC committees of the Senate and the House.

 

They also brandished the signature page to support their claim. Also, contributing at the briefing, Senator Binta Masi Garba, said that the hurriedly passed Electoral Bill was nothing, but handiwork of an individual who might be thinking that he was holier or greater than the state. “An individual cannot be holier than the state and besides, power is transient and is given by God,” he said.

 

She pointed out that those behind the new sequence of elections were more or less enemies of the country by not considering the economic implications it would have on the economy, noting, “if INEC, based on economic problems at hand mapped out two layers of elections, why coming up with three segmented sequence of elections?”

 

Counter press briefing

 

In a swift reaction to the briefing of the pro-Buhari senators, Senate’s spokesman, Aliyu Sabi, and Chairman, Senate committee on INEC, Suleiman Nazif, in a counter press briefing, said the amendment was not targeted at anybody, but carried out in national interest.

 

 

According to them, aside the contentious section 25(1) of the amended Act, six other core areas of electoral processes were worked upon with the aim of deepening democratic process in the country, pointing out that “we did it in the best interest of Nigerians and not for any selfish agenda.”

 

Asked what the Senate would do if President Buhari decides to veto the bill based on the raging controversy, Sabi, who represents Niger North Senatorial District on the platform of the APC said: “When we get to the bridge, we shall determine how to cross it.” On his part, Nazif denied the allegation that he did not sign the report, showing the document’s signature page where he duly signed to prove that he endorsed the report totally.

 

He said: “et me make it very clear that I have signed on the concurrence committee report. I don’t know where that came from but I signed it. This is it, signed by me (displaying the report’s signature page) and if you go to the clerk, it is also signed by me.”

 

Commenting on the allegation by the opposing senators that the amendment reordering sequence of election targeted Buhari, he said” “I am not aware if the sequence of election is being targeted at anybody.

 

What I know is that as Chairman of the Committee on INEC in the Senate, I have a responsibility and I chaired the concurrence committee of both the House and the Senate. “But politics is dynamic.

 

What I know is that there are reasons for elections, people have different reasons for why elections should start from the top to down and from down to top. In the past, we have had elections from the top to down. I don’t know if anybody questioned that. In the past also, we have also had elections from down to top. I don’t know if anybody questioned that.”

Save

Save

Continue Reading

Politics

Piecemeal restructuring won’t guarantee true federalism –Sowunmi

Published

on

Public affairs analyst, Mr. Biodun Sowunmi, speaks with WALE ELEGBEDE on killings by herdsmen, the Third Force movement and the restructuring of the country

 

The killings by the herdsmen haven’t abated despite the promises of government. What do you think makes the killing spree to continue?

 

The inability of the Federal Government to halt the rampaging herdsmen militia is a clear demonstration of lack of political will and cold complicity on the part of the Muhammadu Buhari administration. Let no one be in doubt about the capacity of our security forces.

 

These gallant officers are disabled by the body language of the President and utterances bordering on the justification of the senseless loss of lives by some government ministers and security chiefs, consequently fuelling the killings going on in our country.

 

How best can the menace be tackled and do you support the proposed cattle colonies?

 

The primary duty of any responsible government is to protect lives and property.

 

The Buhari administration is found wanting in this regard. What should normally be the strength of the government is now its weakness. I mean the centralisation of our policing system has created a weak institution that tends to look up to the sitting President for a signal to crack down on criminality such as the menace of the herdsmen. What needs to be done has been articulated by Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo and the governors.

 

They have correctly stated that federalising our policing system through the creation of state police is the right trajectory. Hence, we need to restructure the country now in order to save lives. The idea of creating cattle colony is anachronistic. Cattle colony belongs to the 18th and 19th centuries.

 

We are in the 20th century, where ranching is the modern way of rearing cattle. There is no country rearing cattle in a colony that is a leading producer / exporter of beef or milk. So, the Federal Government should embrace new method rather than an outdated practice of cattle colony. I think it is only Pakistan and one other backwater country that still have cattle colony.

 

The APC Committee on restructuring seems to be serious on delivering its mandate. Do you think they can birth the restructuring you and others have been canvassing for?

 

The APC has decided to swim with the tide. Nigerians have been clamouring for restructuring. To be fair to APC, the party did promise it through devolution of powers.

 

 

But it was foot-dragging until when it became obvious that something has to be done about the agitations for true federalism. What APC has done with its proposal is to also create another problem for oil-rich states or zones.

 

 

Their agenda is to retain the proceeds from oil wells on the water while the states keep the ones on land. However, I am pessimistic. If APC is thinking of submitting its restructuring agenda to the National Assembly, then we are most unlikely going to restructure the country before the 2019 elections. What the Federal Government needs to do is to convene a referendum on the 2014 Confab or convoke a sovereign national conference.

 

 

The call for state police has been accepted by the presidency and the governors. Are we seeing restructuring already or you don’t support this piecemeal approach?

This is a fire brigade approach and a dumb attempt to still retain unitary rule. The piecemeal approach must be rejected by all. It is simply not going to work. We need to practice federalism in its real sense and not a mish-mash political system. Even if we introduce State Police, what about mining, power, etc. There are no federal indigenes or residents.

 

We only have residents/indigenes of the different ethnic nations making up a country called Nigeria. So, the introduction of state police alone will not satisfy those of us bent on saving Nigeria from total collapse.

 

We need to create a new structure that assigns defence, immigration, customs, and foreign affairs to the coordinating centre (federal government) and allow the federating states or components to be responsible for other functions.

 

What is your take on the call by former President Olusegun Obasanjo for a national coalition?

 

I endorse the need for a third force. The APC and PDP are gradually sinking the ship of the Nigerian state.

 

We have been moving from one crisis to the other. It is now time for all progressives and well-meaning Nigerians to join forces to build a new Nigeria. Obasanjo’s prescription of a third force is the vehicle to challenge the entrenched interests that PDP and APC are representing. But the panacea to Nigeria’s headaches is to restructure to have a truly federal Nigeria.

 

 

Are you worried about the growing rate of underage voters in the country?

 

The 2019 general elections integrity is already compromised with the high level of child voters recorded in the North.

 

This trend started in 2003 and it has gotten to the pinnacle with what l saw in some states in the North where political parties mobilised the children below 18 years to register, it’s very sad. The truth is that votes buying on the election day is less dangerous than when children in millions are allowed to vote. INEC can’t pretend was not aware of this ugly attitude

Continue Reading

Politics

POLITRICKS: Curing Amosun’s favour ahead of 2019

Published

on

The battle for who succeeds Governor Ibikunle Amosun in Ogun State is gaining momentum as over 20 aspirants have already declared for the governorship seat.

 

Apart from the gubernatorial aspirants who are working hard to emerge as All Progressives Congress (APC) flag bearer in the forthcoming 2019 elections, some party chieftains and aides of the governor are also strategically positioning themselves to be at advantage positions in the scheme of things.

 

Knowing the importance of curing the favour of the governor, some aspirants during Amosun’s 60th birthday took to the media, both broadcast and print media to shower praises on the governor.

 

Some even went further to paint the social media red with congratulatory messages on their respective platforms.

 

Politricks also noticed that some of the aides and political associates of the governor used either his personal pictures or photographs they took with him as their DPs on the various social media platforms.

Continue Reading

Trending

Take advantage of our impressive online traffic; advertise your brands and products on this site. Call

 

For Advert Placement and Enquiries, Call:

Mobile Phone:+234 803 304 2915

 

Online Editor: Michael Abimboye

Mobile Phone: 0813 699 6757

Email: mmakesense@gmail.com

 

Copyright © 2018 NewTelegraph Newspaper.

%d bloggers like this: