A member of the Peoples
Democratic Party, Emmanuel Onu, has filed a fresh suit asking the
Federal High Court in Abuja to remove Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu as the
National Chairman of the party.
Onu asked the court
to remove Mu’azu and reinstate the immediate past National Chairman of
the party, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, whose resignation on January 15, 2014,
the plaintiff argued failed to comply with the provisions of the party’s
constitution.
Mu’azu was on January 15,
appointed by the party’s National Executive Committee to succeed
Turkur, who the plaintiff argued resigned under circumstances that never
followed due process.
A lawyer and a member of the PDP, Ezionye Ndubuisi, had on September 23 filed a similar suit before the same court seeking an order sacking Mu’azu as the PDP National Chairman.
Ndubuisi had asked the court to remove Mu’azu on the grounds that he did not emerge as the National Chairman of the party through an election at a special convention of the party as stipulated by the party’s constitution.
The older case has yet to be heard by the court.
Onu, who anchored his fresh suit on grounds similar to those of Ndubuisi, joined as defendants, the PDP, Mu’azu and the Independent National Electoral Commission.
He argued that the resignation of Tukur and the subsequent appointment of Mu’azu violated sections 47(5) and (6) of the PDP Constitution 2012.
His counsel, Mr. Elochukwu Nweke, stated in his written address accompanying the suit, “A literal interpretation of section 47(5) is that a letter of resignation of an elected officer of the 1st defendant (PDP) serves as a notice and as such a letter becomes operational after the period of 30days elapses. This is to enable the Executive Committee time and room to carry out the process of filling the vacancy.
“Also a literal interpretation of section 47(6) is to the effect that if such an election cannot be conducted within a period of 30days, an appointment ought to be made by the appropriate committee and until and election is conducted. By necessary implication, it is mandatory that election shall be conducted thereafter.”
The plaintiff said instead of complying with the provisions of the party’s constitution, what transpired was that “On 15th day of January, 2014, a purported envelope containing a resignation letter by Alhaji Bamanga Tukur was presented to National Executive Committee.
“The committee debated it and accepted the same day. On 20th day of January, 2014, Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu was appointed the National Chairman of the 1st defendant.”
He added, “We firmly state that the emergence and appointment of the 2nd defendant (Mu’azu) within a period of five days was premature, invalid and unconstitutional.
“The appointment of the 1st defendant is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse.”
Ndubuisi had asked the court to remove Mu’azu on the grounds that he did not emerge as the National Chairman of the party through an election at a special convention of the party as stipulated by the party’s constitution.
The older case has yet to be heard by the court.
Onu, who anchored his fresh suit on grounds similar to those of Ndubuisi, joined as defendants, the PDP, Mu’azu and the Independent National Electoral Commission.
He argued that the resignation of Tukur and the subsequent appointment of Mu’azu violated sections 47(5) and (6) of the PDP Constitution 2012.
His counsel, Mr. Elochukwu Nweke, stated in his written address accompanying the suit, “A literal interpretation of section 47(5) is that a letter of resignation of an elected officer of the 1st defendant (PDP) serves as a notice and as such a letter becomes operational after the period of 30days elapses. This is to enable the Executive Committee time and room to carry out the process of filling the vacancy.
“Also a literal interpretation of section 47(6) is to the effect that if such an election cannot be conducted within a period of 30days, an appointment ought to be made by the appropriate committee and until and election is conducted. By necessary implication, it is mandatory that election shall be conducted thereafter.”
The plaintiff said instead of complying with the provisions of the party’s constitution, what transpired was that “On 15th day of January, 2014, a purported envelope containing a resignation letter by Alhaji Bamanga Tukur was presented to National Executive Committee.
“The committee debated it and accepted the same day. On 20th day of January, 2014, Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu was appointed the National Chairman of the 1st defendant.”
He added, “We firmly state that the emergence and appointment of the 2nd defendant (Mu’azu) within a period of five days was premature, invalid and unconstitutional.
“The appointment of the 1st defendant is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse.”
No comments:
Post a Comment