PDP: Grappling with harsh realities of zoning

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s call for the resignation of the House of Representatives Speaker, Mr. Aminu Tambuwal, and his deputy, Mr. Emeka Ihedioha, has rekindled the debate over the Peoples Democratic Party’s power sharing formula, NIYI ODEBODE writes.

One would have thought that the Peoples Democratic Party had come to terms with the emergence of the House of Representatives leadership. The House, which is dominated by the PDP, threw spanners in the works of the ruling party when it elected Mr. Aminu Tambuwal from the North-West as its speaker. Tambuwal’s deputy, Mr. Emeka Ihedioha, hails from the South-East. The action of the House forced the PDP to eat the humble pie because it was obvious that it could not have its way.

One of the PDP leaders, who felt slighted by the election of Tambuwal and Ihedioha, was former President Olusegun Obasanjo. The PDP had zoned the speakership of the House to the former president’s zone, South-West.

The party also zoned the Senate Presidency to the North-Central; the deputy Senate presidency to the South-East and deputy speakership to the North-East. The South-East produced the Secretary to the Government of the Federation. But the election of Tambuwal and his deputy left the South-West with nothing in the country’s power equation.

After the PDP released its power sharing formula in May, its chieftains in the South-West, who were still smarting from a crushing defeat by the Action Congress of Nigeria in the April elections, met at the Hilltop home of Obasanjo in Abeokuta. The chieftains said that they were acting on a directive of the national leaders of the party, who gave the South-West the go-ahead to produce a speaker. The South-West leaders picked Alhaji Muraina Ajibola, as the zone’s consensus candidate for the post. Although the PDP National Vice-Chairman (South-West), Alhaji Tajudeen Oladipo, who announced the decision, said Obasanjo was not at the meeting, nobody was deceived that the lawmaker was Obasanjo’s candidate.

It will be recalled that during the House power probe, Ajibola was said to have shielded Obasanjo from being summoned to explain his role in the controversial award of $16bn power contract. His perceived closeness to Obasanjo was more or less a liability to him when the race for the coveted seat became hot. Many members of the House saw him as Obasanjo’s man.

The PDP and President Goodluck Jonathan must have had this in mind when they ‘anointed’ another lawmaker from the South-West, Mrs. Mulikat Adeola-Akande, as their candidate for the speakership. They thought that Adeola-Akande would be more acceptable to the House than Ajibola.

But their calculation was wrong. Neither Adeola-Akande nor Ajibola was in the reckoning of the lawmakers. When it dawned on them that the party’s plan was up against a brick-wall, the immediate past PDP National Chairman, Dr. Haliru Mohammed, and a former Board of Trustees Chairman, Chief Tony Anenih, who came to witness the election of the House leaders on June 6, left the chambers in anger. Although, the PDP threatened to discipline Tambuwal and Ihedioha, it was forced to treat them with kid gloves after the two lawmakers went to the party’s headquarters to apologise.

Accepting their apology, Mohammed, had said, “We are quite aware that you and your colleagues in the House did not quite work in line with the policy of our party. But you have not left the party. What has happened has happened.

“The PDP, being a large party, and a collection of different mindsets, we are used to crises in the affairs of our party. We believe in different views and like we said in our statement, we believe in free choice, for all Nigerians including members of the National Assembly.

“The PDP is a versatile party, and we have got the organisation and the strength to weather all our problems and to work our solutions to whatever misunderstanding that arises within the family. The election of the speaker has happened. I am glad it was free and fair because we observed it; although it didn’t go according to the dictates of the party. We are faced with a fait accompli. What remains now is for the party to use our usual dispute resolution mechanism to work out the way forward.”

Although Mohammed accepted the apology of the speaker and his deputy, he said their emergence was not the end of the party’s zoning arrangement. He had said, “I am sure Mr. Speaker, your election will not mean the end of zoning. Because if we don’t take zoning as a policy, the PDP is a party of equity and fair play; and equity and fair play demands that in the party and the government, each section of this country should have at least one position or the other so that we can achieve peace and stability.”

The former acting chairman’s description of Tambuwal’s emergence as fait accompli, could not have been acceptable to Obasanjo judging by his antecedents. Like the solider he is, the former president usually retreats in the face of defeat in order to fight another day. Anybody that does not know the stuff the Balogun of Owu is made of can ask a former PDP chairman, Chief Audu Ogbeh. Ogbeh and Obasanjo had openly disagreed over the latter’s role in the Anambra State crisis, where the then Governor, Chris Ngige, was abducted. Ogbeh had in a letter dated December 6, 2004 chastised Obasanjo for his role in the crisis. Obasanjo later visited Ogbeh in his Abuja home, where a reconciliatory meeting was held. The duo were treated to a sumptuous meal of pounded yam and vegetable soup. With the reconciliation, many had thought that the battle of the two titans was over. But that was not to be, as the former president later asked Ogbeh to resign.

Those who know the ex-president were not surprised when at the PDP’s BOT meeting, he resurrected the zoning of the posts of the speaker and the deputy speaker. During the meeting, which was held at the Presidential Villa, Obasanjo said their emergence violated the PDP’s zoning arrangement. He said Tambuwal and Ihedioha had no right to occupy the offices, which were not zoned to the North-West and South-East, where they hail from.

From all indications, Obasanjo’s comments have thrown the PDP into another confusion. Investigations showed that while other leaders agreed that Tambuwal and Ihedioha had erred, they were at a loss on what to do. A member of the PDP’s National Working Committee, who pleaded anonymity, had in an interview with THE PUNCH said, “That was the first time that the authority would be challenged and we know that Tambuwal and others have laid a bad precedent, but the PDP as a political party does not control all members of the House of Representatives.”

Obasanjo’s comments have been attracting reactions. Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, described his stance on zoning as hypocrisy. “It is surprising that former President Obasanjo is now posturing as the apostle of zoning when indeed, he was the one who did everything to destroy that equitable means of power sharing among all sections of Nigeria,” Abubakar said.

Reactions by members of the House have also shown that attempts to remove Tambuwal and Emeka Ihedioha, will be resisted.

The Deputy House Leader, Mr. Leo Ogor, described Obasanjo’s call for the speaker’s removal as “a non-issue.” Ogor, a PDP member, said the House would insist on its independence.

Another PDP member, Ken Chikere, warned the PDP and Obasanjo to handle the issue of the House carefully. He stated that if the party initiated any move to remove the speaker and his deputy, they would get more support.

Obasanjo had at the BOT meeting said Tambuwal and Ihedioha must leave their positions after two years. It is obvious that there is no respite for them yet. They must preside over the House with their eyes open as troubles are still lurking in a corner.