I have followed the conversations on the raging crisis in our party and I am worried about the misinterpretation of the PDP constitution by the Deputy National Publicity Secretary and many other commentators as regards the import of the operations of Section 35(5)(c) and 47(6) of the PDP Constitution 2017 (As Amended).
To that extent, I commend my conversation with another PDP brother on these silent issues which also cover the widespread misinterpretations of the said sections 35(5)(c) and 47(6) and other sundry issues related to the Damagun controversy.
I have framed four questions and queries the resolution of which will throw light on the issues at stake. Kindly follow the conversation below.
- The first query or poser is whether a National Chairman of a political party is appointed or elected? My Answer to that based on the extant provisions of the PDP Constitution 2017 (As Amended) is that both election or appointment applies. Section 47 (2) provides for the election of party executives whose tenure is fixed for a period of four years under section 47 (1). Under section 47 (2) the election of NEC members is at a national convention, while all other levels of executives from the Ward, LGA, State and Zonal levels is at Congresses held at these levels as is appropriate.
However, in the wisdom of the framers of our constitution, they recognised that vacancies may occur in unforeseen or even foreseen circumstances, thus section 47(6) provides for appointment of party officer(s) to fill vacancies by the executive committee at the appropriate level whenever it occurs pending the conduct of a Congress or Convention to replace the officer(s) or executives.
To this extent, the PDP constitution does not only recognise but provides for a dual method of selection of party executives. Election is the generic method, while appointment is the exceptional or special method.
- The second query or poser is whether Damagun was appointed to the office or assumed office by virtue of the provisions of section 35 (3)(c)? My answer is that he assumed office pursuant to the import of section 35(5)(c). This section, however, like I previously stated is not a stand alone section that operates in isolation of the other provisions of the constitution. The said section even in its own language, letters and spirit subject it’s operations to the provisions of section 47(6) which provides the substantial provisions on how to deal with the question of vacancies at all levels of the executive committees within the party. Like I said earlier section 47(6) unlike section 47 (2) that provides the generic method of election of party executives provides for appointment of those officer(s) and executives in the prescribed circumstances.
Note that section 35(3)(c) ordinarily deals with the functions or role of the office of the Deputy National Chairman in Acting Capacity from the part of the country(please note the emphasis on part of the country. I will explain shortly ) where the substantive National Chairman comes from in the event of his removal or resignation from office pending a substantive replacement.
So section 35 (5)(c) is not a substantive provision on replacement of the National Chairman but a procedural or hierarchical succession prescription based on the fact that our constitution provides for two Deputy National Chairmen representing the Northern and Southern parts of the country; and in the absence of a clear cut succession chart prescription between the two officers of concurrent or coordinate authority and status there is bound to be a controversy as to who is to take charge in the event of a removal or resignation of a substantive National Chairman.
In a nutshell, section 35(5)(c) deals with taking charge as Acting National Chairman in the absence of a substantive National Chairman, while section 47 (6) deals with the substantive appointment or election and replacement of a National Chairman who has resigned or was removed.
- The third query or poser is “What is ‘Area’ or ‘Zone’ of the Substantive National Chairman? My answer is that, it is NORTH CENTRAL ZONE . If you recall my previous explanation of this issue, which I shall further expantiate with relevant provisions of our constitution. I said Area as used in the PDP constitution connotes more of a noun than an adjective, but because it is not specifically defined it may have raised your curiosity. However, based on its context and usage in section 47(6) it is clear that it is a noun that is applicable to a place at the Ward, LGA and State levels of party administration and organization. The word is also sparingly used occurring particularly in section 47 (6). This means that Area is essentially a sub-unit at the sub-national and any reference to it has greater affinity to state level party administration than national, while Zone is with regards to the six geopolitical zones of the country and National party administration. The two words are not interchangeably used but disjunctive to say “area or zone “.
The swap or rotation of national party offices is not specifically provided for in the party constitution but as a convention, which like I previously stated is done at broad level of North/South these two are not zones and are not recognized as zones in the PDP constitution under sections 12(1) and 67(1)(m) but as the two parts of the country.
To this extent, section 47(6) does not contemplate the appointment of replacements for vacant NEC positions on the basis of “parts ” of the country but on the basis of Area (subnational) and zone (national).
This is consistent with the recognized structural organogram of the party as provided in section 12(1) to wit: Ward, LGA, State, Zonal and National and section 67 (1)(m). These are the only five recognized concentric centres and structures for general party administration and allocation of offices within the PDP, even the two Deputy National Chairmen representing the two parts of north/south are further micro-zoned on the basis of the six geopolitical zones at the part level. That is why the National Chairman was swapped from the southern part to the northern part of the country and further micro-zoned to the NORTH CENTRAL so the Chairmanship position of the PDP is in the NORTH CENTRAL ZONE while the Acting National Chairman/Deputy National Chairman is from the NORTH EAST ZONE
- The last query or poser is to the effect that is micro-zoning constitutional or a gentleman’s agreement under the PDP constitution? My answer is that, it is constitutional . Section 7(3)(c) of the extant PDP constitution provides as a fundamental objective of the party the adherence ” …to the policy of the rotation and zoning of party and public elective offices in pursuance of the principle of equity, justice and fairness”
This is the constitutional basis upon which our founding fathers established the principle of swapping party offices between the northern and southern parts of the country and zoning it to the six geopolitical zones as recognized by our constitution. See section 67(1)(m).
These positions are further micro-zoned to states within the zones to ensure for equity and fairness because the substantive offices of the NWC are not enough to go round so each zone and state is afforded an opportunity to have a bite at the cherry.
I pray, this suffices to address some of the erroneous interpretations being bandied around on the correct interpretation of our constitution as it relates to these issues.
@Dr. Alex Adum