Nomination Of Dantala Kefas Agbu As PDP Gubernatorial Candidate For Taraba State Is In Violation Of The Constitution Of The PDP (As Amended 2017)

By Muhammad Awwal Danlami

PDP in its constitution provided for rotation and zoning of elective offices such as office of Governor in order to promote mutual respect for our religious and cultural diversity.

Section 7(3)(b) & (c) of the Constitution of the PDP (as amended 2017) provides thus:

“7(3) The Party SHALL pursue these aims and objectives by –

…(b) promoting mutual respect for, and understanding of the religious and cultural diversity of Nigeria;

(c) adhering to the policy of the rotation and zoning of Party and Public elective offices in pursuance of the principle of equity, justice and fairness….”

Therefore, since the current Governor of Taraba State, Darius Ishaku is a Christian from southern Taraba, the implication of the above section is that Governorship candidate MUST come from another zones (i.e. Northern or Central Zone) other than southern Taraba and MUST be a Muslim.

It is glaringly clear from the wordings of section 7(3) (b) & (c) of the Constitution of PDP (2017) the word “Shall” are used in all the statutes. The position of the law is that the word “shall” in its ordinary meaning is a word of command which is normally given a compulsory meaning. The word is intended to denote an obligation. The word “shall” when used in a statutory provision imports that a thing must be done. It is not merely permissive, it is MANDATORY. See the case SPEAKER KADUNA STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY & ORS V. NKOM & ANOR (2019) LPELR-50961(CA) PP.13-14. In the case of LINGO (NIG) LTD V. ARTCO IND. LTD (2020) LPELR-51744(CA) P.13, the court held thus: “It is clear there was the use of the word “shall” which in its ordinary meaning when used connotes a command, and that which must be given a compulsory meaning.”

In this instance, the current Governor of Taraba State is a Christian from southern Taraba, the PDP in violation of the provisions of section 7(3)(b) & (c) decided to nominate another person in person of Dantala Kefas Agbu, a Christian from southern Taraba. Reading the supremacy section of the Constitution of PDP i.e. section 2; the PDP constitution is supreme and its provision shall have binding force on all members and organs of the Party. As such the nomination of Kefas Agbu is null and void ab initio.

One may argue that issues of this nature are internal affairs of the party which cannot be interfered by the court. It  should be noted that political party is like a club. A voluntary association. It has its rules, regulations, guidelines and constitution. Members join the party on their own free will. By joining they have freely given their consent to be bound by the rules, regulations, guidelines and constitution of the party. These rules of the party must be obeyed by all members (including the Defendant herein) of the party, as the party’s decision is final over its own affairs. Members of a party would do well to understand and appreciate the finality of a party’s decision over its domestic or internal affairs. The court would only interfere where the party has violated its own rules. See the case of JOE O. AGI, SAN V. PDP & ORS (2017) 17 NWLR (pt. 1595) p.386 at 459. Therefore, the Supreme Court in the case of EMENIKE V. PDP (2012) 12 NWLR (PT.1315) 556 AT 589 held that “political parties must comply with its constitution and electoral guidelines in the nomination of its candidates.”

By Muhammad Awwal Danlami | Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria | Associate, Prime Dispute | African Student for Liberty, Local Coordinator | Member International Bar Association | International Intellectual Property Law Association | +2348084131790, +2348038796249 |