Erstwhile chairman of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Bamaga Tukur, Wednesday, asked a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja to reinstate him as the national chairman of the party and order that he should be allowed to preside over the party’s forthcoming national convention.
Not done yet, Tukur also prayed the court to order that he should be allowed to preside over the affairs of the party until 2016, when his tenure as the party’s national chairman will expire.
According to court papers seen by THEWILL, Tukur maintained that he was stampeded into resigning as national chairman of the party as a condition for the seven defected PDP governors to return to the party in the aftermath of the crisis that rocked the ruling party following the defection of seven PDP governors to the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2013.
His prayers were contained in a counter claim he filed at the registry of the court Wednesday through his lawyer, Adamson Adeboro.
In his counter claim filed at the court, Tukur is asking the court for an order setting aside his purported resignation letter dated January 15, 2014 and reinstate him as the substantive and duly elected chairman of the party at its national convention in 2012 until the completion of his term in 2016.
He also wants the court to restrain PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from further recognising, permitting or allowing Mu’azu to preside over the affairs of the party.
He further wants the court to declare that his resignation was null and void and that the appointment of Mu’azu by the NEC of the party was also null and void being inconsistent with Section 45(1) and (2) of the party constitution.
Tukur had earlier asked the court to determine whether his purported resignation complied with Section 47(5) of the PDP’s constitution as amended.
Tukur also asked the court to decide whether if his purported resignation did not comply with Section 47(5) of the PDP’s constitution will not render the resignation null and void.
He also wants the court to decide whether the appointment of Mu’azu is not in contravention of Section 45(1) and (2) of the party constitution, Section 85(3) of the Electoral Act, 2010 and Section 223(1) of the 1999 Constitution.
Tukur filed the counter claims as the suit instituted by an aspirant to the House of Representatives in Adamawa State, Aliyu Abuba Gurin, came for hearing. Gurin is seeking to sack the incumbent PDP national chairman, Adamu Mu’azu, from office and also stop the forthcoming PDP delegates convention.
Presiding judge, Justice Evoh Chukwu, is expected to hear Tukur’s requests Thursday morning.
In the original suit, the plaintiff, Gurin, is asking the court to stop the PDP national convention scheduled to hold between December 10 and 11 in Abuja.
Gurin also contended that the Tukur’s resignation did not comply with the provision of Section 47(5) of the constitution of the party which stipulates that a 30-day notice be given to the National Executive Committee by Tukur.
Listed as defendants in the suit are the PDP, Tukur, Mu’azu and INEC.
In a seven-paragraph affidavit in support of the counter claim deposed to by one Femi Ekperobe, Tukur said he had stepped aside as the chairman of the party for the defected governors to return but to his surprise, 10 months after, the governors are yet to return.
He also said that in the situation where he could not finish his four year tenure as the chairman of the party, he was supposed to hand over to the deputy national chairman as acting chairman, in line with constitution of the party pending the holding of a national convention to elect new national chairman.
Tukur maintained that the NEC of the party has no power to appoint the national chairman, saying the votes and proceedings of NEC held at the party’s secretariat in Abuja on January 15 and 20 which deliberated on his resignation as national chairman and appointment of Mu’azu as chairman are null and void.
According to Tukur, even if he had submitted a letter of resignation on January 15 to the party, the letter did not comply with Section 47(5) of the party’s constitution which requires that a 30 – day prior notice should be given.
He stated that the subsequent presentation of Mu’azu to NEC as the new chairman for appointment did not comply with Section 47(6) of the party constitution, Section 85(3) of the Electoral Act, 2010 and Section 223(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
He maintained that when Mu’azu was appointed as the national chairman of the party, no vacancy existed in the office of the national chairman even as he stressed that Mu’azu lacked the power to preside over the forthcoming convention of the party as such will nullify the proceedings of the convention if allowed to do so.
However, Tukur said it would be in the interest of all parties to the suit if status quo ante bellum is maintained, pending the election of a new chairman by the national convention.
Credit: The Will
