The crisis rocking the House of Representatives’ caucus of the All Progressives Congress (APC) may continue unabated, as one of the warring parties in the lingering conflict, the APC Loyalists’ Group, has insisted that it is either Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila gets the House leadership post or there will be no deal.
It tasked the party leadership on the need to protect the supremacy of the APC, adding that the political party is an institution whose supremacy must always be preserved.
The group, in a letter dated July 18 and addressed to the National Chairman of APC, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, said that to accept the Speaker’s arrangement would mean that the two most powerful positions in the Senate and House would be occupied by the North.
“We are not in doubt that all the shenanigans is merely a pretext to exclude our principal Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, a man acknowledged to have served the House, party and country meritoriously, who was the face of opposition in the National Assembly and who led our party from minority to majority in the House,” it said.
It laid out various arguments to counter the issues raised by the Speaker of the House, Hon. Yakubu Dogara, in a similar letter to the party leadership.
One of such arguments was on the issue of adherence to the federal character principle, which the Dogara group gave as reason for its opposition to Gbajabiamila emerging as the House leader since his zone, the South-west, has already produced the Deputy Speaker.
But the APC Loyalists’ Group, in its letter signed by Hon. Nasiru Sani Zangon-Daura, punctured the argument, saying that the application of the principle of federal character does not extend to elective positions.
The group also said that Dogara’s letter was fraught with several fundamental flaws in his analysis and interpretation of the constitution as well as the House rules.
“Our attention has been drawn to the letter written to you by the Speaker Hon. Yakubu Dogara, in response to your letter to him almost a month prior. We find Hon. Dogara’s letter fraught with several fundamental flaws in his analysis and interpretation of the constitution and House rules,” said the group.
While maintaining their stance, the Gbajabiamila-led group held that federal character, as it relates to the constitutional provisions is strictly in reference to the appointment to the “federal executive and its agencies”.
It said that if the federal character principle was meant to be applicable to the National Assembly, then the headship of the House of Representatives and the Senate would have been shared between the south and the north.
They argued that if the framers of our constitution had intended same to apply to the running of the legislative Houses, similar provisions which mandated the president specifically, would have been included in the case of the National Assembly.
“The principle of federal character is not intended to be given such elasticity to the extent that it would extend to the running and internal workings of the House which is not a government agency and whose members are not appointed but elected.
“Remember sir, that in the run-up to the election of the Senate President and Speaker, our party made a deliberate choice to apply this same principle of federal character such that all qualified zones will be represented in the spirit of national unity, which we embraced, but we all know how that ended,” it said.
The group accused Dogara of hypocrisy regarding the issue of zoning, having earlier rejected the party’s proposed zoning plan when it became apparent that it would zone the speakership to the South-west and Senate presidency to the North-east.
It described Dogara’s action as disingenuous, insincere and downright hypocritical, adding that it was unacceptable for someone who rejected and was anti-zoning to now be the person waiving the zoning card when it serves his purpose.
“We cannot pick and choose or flip-flop on the application of zoning based on our whims and caprices and he who comes to equity must come with clean hands.
“Whilst we maintain that our party’s mantra of ‘Change’ for the growth and development of our dear nation requires that merit should not be sacrificed on the altar of zoning, we have painstakingly ensured that in the selection of our leaders in the House, all zones are represented, except the South-east, which unfortunately is currently excluded from holding leadership positions because the House rules disqualifies ‘inexperienced’ members from holding leadership positions.
“Unfortunately, all our party members from the South-east are first term legislators. The South-east can be adequately compensated through other means without violating our rules on appointment of principal officers.
“Again the Speaker referred to the Third Schedule Part 1c of the constitution which he quotes in part, leaving out vital provisions which would not support the position of zoning in the National Assembly.
“We encourage the party to read this provision closely, particularly Section 8 which lists the bodies over which the Federal Character Commission has jurisdiction.
“Indeed, Section 8 of the third schedule sets up the Federal Character Commission and it provides as follows: ‘In giving effect to the provisions of Section 14(3) and (4) of this constitution, the commission shall have the power to work out an equitable formula subject to the approval of the National Assembly for the distribution of all cadres of posts in the public service of the federation and of the states, the armed forces of the federation, the Nigeria Police Force and other government security agencies, government owned companies and parastatals of the states’,” it said.
On the issue of the House rules, it said the Speaker’s letter did not address the most important rule of all as it relates to appointment of principal officers under Order 7 Rule 37, which states that “only members with cognate legislative experience as members of the National Assembly shall be eligible for appointment as principal officers”.
According to the group, the said rule “goes to the very heart of the issue of the South-east not being represented in the majority party positions. This rule is relevant because the thrust of the Speaker’s argument is that one zone cannot have two slots out of six slots open to the party. However before we can even begin to talk of zoning, one must first qualify for the office”.
