The Ondo State All Progressives Congress (APC) is in disarray. The post-primary crisis is taking its toll on the troubled chapter. Although the Primary Appeal Panel recommended a fresh shadow poll, the option was discarded by the National Chairman, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, to the consternation of aspirants and their aggrieved supporters. The name of the disputed winner of the controversial primary, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), has been forwarded to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the flag bearer. But, other aspirants -Dr. Segun Abraham, Chief Olusola Oke and Prof. Ajayi Boroffice-are kicking. Concerned party chieftains have objected to the ratification of the primary result. Others are calling for reconciliation, ahead of the November 26 election. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU examines the implications of the post-primary crisis for the crisis-ridden party and steps that should be taken to restore harmony.
The Ondo State All Progressives Congress (APC) may have decided to bury itself in self-deception. Its members are pretending to be warming up for the governorship election. The chapter in deep crisis. The division over the outcome of its disputed primary has persisted, following the dumping of the Primary Appeal Committee report by the National Working Committee (NWC) that set it up. Although there were opportunities for reconciliation, the National Chairman, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, has failed to explore them. Unable to put its house in order, the troubled chapter wobbles on to the poll as a divided house.
The primary generated interest beyond the party. Judging by the number of the contenders, many observers predicted that crisis could not be averted. But, the post-primary controversy has nothing to do with the huge number of aspirants. The APC is suffering from self-inflicted wounds. Little did the stakeholders guess that the shadow poll will bear fruits of discord and bitterness. Today, the chapter is more divided than before the primary. At the weekend, one of the aggrieved aspirants, Olusola Oke, defected from the party to the Alliance for Democracy (AD). Much energy is now being dissipated on crisis and elusive reconciliation more than the preparation for the governorship poll.
At the Dome, Akure, the state capital, the exercise organised by Jigawa State Governor Abubakar Badaru was peaceful. One of the candidates, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), who polled 569 votes, was declared winner. There was a jubilation among his supporters. After a moment of sober reflection, some aspirants accepted their fate and congratulated the candidate. Many thought that Ondo APC had passed the primary test.
But, the celebration was short-lived. Reality dawned on the contenders who had already congratulated Akeredolu that they did so in error. Allegations of irregularities filled the air. According to the aspirants, the primary was manipulated to achieve a pre-determined outcome. Many chieftains called for the nullification of the results and a fresh contest.
In response to the complaints, the NWC set up the appeal panel as a platform for the ventilation of grievances. In its report, the committee recommended the cancellation of the disputed shadow poll. The panel headed by Mrs. Hellen Bendega also recommended that a re-run primary should be held immediately to beat the deadline set by the INEC. In its 16-page report, the panel also suggested that the national leadership of the party should revert to the earlier delegates’ list, which was distributed to aspirants in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), shortly before the controversial exercise. The report was signed by Bendega, the Secretary to the committee, Mallam Musa Umar, and another member, Nikky Eze.
According to the committee, a final and properly harmonised list acceptable to all contenders should be compiled after elections, adding that delegates’ list should be released, not on the eve of the primary, but much earlier to give sufficient time for the take off of elections and avoid being used in favour of any aspirant.
The panel pointed out that, although there was substantial compliance with rules during the primary, “that consideration may not be sufficient reason to ignore such serious and weighty, identified irregularities.”
“In view of the change mantra of this administration, it is pertinent that the party blazes the trail by refusing to condone a less than perfect exercise. We, therefore, formally submit our recommendations for the National Working Committee (NWC) to use its discretionary powers in line with the APC constitution and the Electoral Act to arrive at a final decision,” the panel said.
No fewer than 24 aspirants participated in the primary. But, the committee received six petitions during its sitting. The complaints came from Oke, Dr Segun Abraham and Prof Ajayi Boroffice; the Chairman of Ondo Central APC, Mr. Adegboyega Adedipe, his Ondo East counterpart, Mr. Akintunde Temitope, and Mrs. Toyin Ajinde, a delegate.
On the eve of the primary, Oke had submitted a petition to the party, alleging a rigging plot. He said the delegates’ list was suspicious, adding that the names on the list were completely strange and substantially different from the one produced at the 2014 congress and the list produced by the state chapter allegedly on the Appel Committee Report. In his letter of September 2 to the party chairman, Hon. Isaacs Kekemeke, he pointed out that the list had been doctored and illegal names injected into it, urging him to seek proper clarification and directive and refrain from using the list. In his view, no free, fair and credible result can come from the perverted and doctored list. The aspirant said he would participate in the primary, believing that his complaints would have been addressed before the exercise.
Oke submitted the same petition to the panel. “Prior to the elections, all aspirants met at the National Secretariat of the APC, Abuja and were issued with a delegates’ list. However, on the eve of the election, precisely 11.30 pm, I received another list from Dr. Tunji Abayomi. I discovered that the new list was completely strange and different substantially from the other one,” he said.
Oke, a lawyer, alleged that, in the new list, the names of over 200 delegates loyal to him were omitted. Instead, the list bore strange names, which did not emanate from any congress as required by the law, the constitution and the APC guidelines. Also, the aspirant faulted the accreditation of delegates, saying that all manners of identification, including students’ identity cards, were used. According to the panel, Oke said “delegates’ tags and manifest were released to Akeredolu’s agents with which they used to convey illegal delegates to the voting centre.”
When Oke was asked to appear before the committee, he brought along a witness who confessed that he was hired by a food vendor and paid N10,000 to vote for Akeredolu. The interloper confessed that he was not a delegate, adding that he and about 16 others were conveyed in a bus marked “official.” Delegates tags were distributed to them while they were inside the bus and these tags enabled them to vote. “Many who wanted to vote for me were disenfranchised, making me to lose much votes. Therefore, since the election was not free and fair, it should be nullified,” Oke said.
Oke maintained that non-delegates were hired and financially induced to vote during the exercise. He alleged that a large cache of delegates’ tags were seen in the custody of persons known to be loyal to the purported winner of the primary indiscriminately and openly distributed to non-delegates who voted during the exercise. He also said the non-delegates, after being given tags, were put into a waiting bus which conveyed them to the voting centres with the Manifest manipulated to cover up the process or sometimes without a manifest.
In the opinion of the aggrieved aspirant, delegates’ tags were merely given out to anyone who presented any mode of identification without ascertaining his or her name on the delegates’ lists, thereby turning the exercise into a bazar and all comers’ affair.
He stressed: “The “winner,” using non-delegates, was able to beat the system due to the Electoral Committee’s failure to conduct further identity confirmation vis-à-vis the delegates’ list before granting delegates entry into the election venue. Using this lapse, the “winner” was able to secure hundreds of unlawful votes catapulting him to victory. I will rely on copies of Manifest Form used at the election to show that non-delegates were allowed to vote at the election.”
Rejecting the results, Abraham called for a fresh poll, saying that 157 fake names were injected into the delegates’ list. He also alleged that some delegates voted twice because of lack of thumb printing ink after voting. He explained that, although he was initially prepared to accept the result, based on his faith in the ability of the party to hold a transparent primary, he later changed her mind, following the evidence of manipulation and fraud.
In his petition to the Primary Appeal Committee, he said the primary was laced with substantial malpractices and irregularities that led to a miscarriage of justice and electoral robbery. He said the primary should be cancelled on four grounds. These were the improper withholding of delegates’ list, the injection of strange names on the list, irregular accreditation and voting and undue partiality and favouritism.
“Twenty six people who should not be on the list voted as Owo delegates; 15 fake delegates appeared on Idanre list. In my constituency, Akoko Northeast, 39 names were removed from the delegates’ list. The vice chairman of my ward, Mr. Jimoh Umaru, and the Akoko Northeast Women Leader could not vote because their names were substituted. In Ward 3, Akure South, the names of 13 members of the executive committee were deleted from the list.
On what he described as “irregular accreditation and voting,” Abraham said: “Delegates were conveyed from the respective accreditation centres to the voting centre in vehicles unaccompanied by aspirants’ agents or representatives. At the voting centre, some delegates got access into the venue without undergoing further screening. Some delegates were able to vote more than once due to lack of thumb printing ink after voting.” Also, the aspirant alleged that while other aspirants’ agents were locked outside the voting centre, the agent of Akeredolu was allowed free movement into the voting arena and was relating with election officials at will.
Abraham urged the panel to deduct the unlawful votes obtained from Idanre and Owo from Akeredolu’s votes. He said the 26 delegates from Owo committed fraud because they did not vote in the presidential, National Assemnly and House of Assembly primaries because they had a post-congress litigation in court. He alleged that Ade Adetimehin, and engineer, and the APC vice chairman in Ondo State, and Ojo Alalabiaye, the chairman of the party in Idanre Council, who are surrogates of Akeredolu, injected 15 fresh names into the list in favour of the purported winner. If that is done, Akeredolu’s votes will drop to 626. Therefore, the panel should declare him winner. If that option was feasible, Abraham said the result should be cancelled and a fresh primary should be held.
Broffice said the primary was not credible because the delegates’ was fraudulent, adding that the improper accreditation of delegates had dented the exercise. He appealed to the panel to cancel the primary and order a fresh one.
Boroffice stressed: “The new list had been grossly corrupted and compromised as names were inserted of persons who did not emerge from any congress and therefore, not eligible to vote. The insertion, which were pervasive and widespread, had displaced the legitimate delegates, thereby depriving me of close to 150 votes. The insertion caused undue advantage to Akeredolu. In Owo, 26 delegates were inserted who never voted in 2015 elections due to a pending court case.
“The delegates’ tags were freely given out to unauthorised persons. The manifests were, in like manner, released to unauthorised persons. As a result, non-delegates were imported into the voting arena, using dedicated buses and more than 300 non-delegates were able to vote.”
Adedipe said the primary was “not anywhere near the true reflection of the opinion of the party in the state.” He alleged that the delegates’ list was padded, pointing out that 50 per cent of legitimate delegates did not vote in Ondo Central. He wondered why the Primary Committee came up with a new delegate’s list, contrary to the earlier agreement that the old list would be used. Noting that voting by non-delegates was possible through the connivance of security agents, he said the exercise should be cancelled.
In his petition titled: ‘A call for the nullification of the fraud-ridden primary,’ Temitope alleged that 64 fake delegates from his zone voted during the exercise while 47 names were omitted on the list. In his view, the list was adulterated, adding that strange names assumed the positions of chairmen in wards 2, 4, 6 and 7. He said accreditation and voting should have taken place at the same venue to prevent fraud.
Ajinde, the Ondo South Women Leader, said it was unimaginable that her name was omitted on the delegates’ list, adding that she was prevented from voting.
The summary of the figures injected on the delegates’ list is 157. The analysis is as follows: State Executive (one strange name), Ondo North Senatorial District (66), Ondo Central (32) and Ondo North 958). The analysis across the affected 13 local governments is as follows: Akoko Northeast (26), Akoko Northwest (13), Ose 91), Owo (26), Akure South (12), Akure North (1), Idanre (15), Ondo West (4), Ile-Oluji/Okeigbo (10), Irele (12), Odigbo (24), and Okitipupa (12).
In Ondo South, the name of the senatorial women leader, Ajide, was removed. Instead, a strange name, Ilemobayo Ojajuwatan, was injected into the State Executive List.
For the sake of equity and fairness, Akeredolu was also invited by the panel. He was accompanied by two aspirants – Dr. Tunji Abayomi, who was described as the Dean, having contested for the position three times, and Senator Tayo Alasoadura. Akeredolu said the delegates’ list was authentic. He also denied tampering with the accreditation process, saying that he had no hand in the distribution of delegate tags. Also, Abayomi and Alasoadura denied that the list was fake.
On the delegates’ list, the submissions of the three politicians were as follows:
-The delegates’ list presented by the Chairman of the Primary Committee on his arrival in Ondo was the harmonised and therefore, authentic for the following reasons:
-After all the 24 governorship aspirants’ meeting with the SGF and the party leadership, the aspirants were provided with the delegates’ list.
-Having observed that the said list had some discrepancies, Dr. Abayomi drew the attention of the Organising Secretary, Senator Osita Izunazo, to the said discrepancies.
-The Organising Secretary thereafter called for the submission of all aspirants’ complaints together with the relevant justification to enable him harmonise the list preparatory to handing over same to the Chairman of the Primary Committee on the committee’s inauguration day.
In response to the claim that the list got to most of the aspirants very late on the eve of the election (11:00 pm-midnight), Abayomi, whose mandate it was to distribute the list, debunked the claims of the late distribution. He said information went out to aspirants to collect the list by 8.30 pm. He said he and Oke spoke three times in the evening on the issue because they both live in close proximity at Ijapo Estate, Akure.
Also, Akeredolu denied tampering with the accreditation, adding that he had no hand in the distribution of the delegate tags.
The Appeal Committee was not satisfied with the defense. To most party chieftains, the Bendega Committee did a thorough job. The panel praised Governor Abubakar for conducting a peaceful exercise. But, it objected to the pre-voting fraud and irregularities that marred the exercise. In its findings, it observed that the delegates’ list was a bone of contention. Its content was disputed and its late distribution enraged many aspirants and party members.
The committee said: “One of the common threads which ran through all the petitions was the delegates’ list. Complaints on the delegates’s list hinged on two issues-its contents and the late distribution.”
On the contents, the panel said: “Although the declared winner admitted to having been satisfied with the harmonised list, he too had initially objected to the “sudden” appearance of strange names on the list. He, however, later abandoned the idea of petitioning, having been convinced by the Chairman of the primary Committee of its authenticity.
“All the three petitioners harped on the “injuries” that the sudden appearance of the said names had caused them. They further buttressed their points by claiming that over 300 persons who were disenfranchised were co-supporters. Since the difference between the declared winner and the third runner-up is less than 200 votes, the petitioners were confident that the potential votes they lost due to the substitution were significant enough to have made a difference to their respective scores. Some aspirants claimed to have “camped” their delegates for a couple of days only to learn at the last minute that the delegates’ names were not on the list.”
The committee frowned at the late release of the list. It said: The timing of the release of the delegates’ list was also a major cause for concern. Dr. Abayomi, by his own admission, stated that information had gone out by 8.30 pm to all aspirants to collect their delegates’ lists. This notice, it is observed, went out less than 24 hours before the commencement of the accreditation of delegates. The late distribution, the aspirant claimed, didn’t afford them sufficient time to lobby delegates. The situation was further compounded by the appearance of strange names of persons they couldn’t easily locate.”
On the accreditation process, the panel said that the confession of non-delegates on the television that they were hired from the streets to rig for a particular candidate cast doubt on the credibility of the process. “Allegations of flawed accreditation process also featured in all the aspirants’ complaints. While some aspirants condemned the conduct of the exercise from the onset, others posited that the process was hijacked midway through the exercise by some overzealous party agents bent on manipulating the process. Delegates’ tags were allegedly seen in the wrong hands as a result of which non-delegates, even non-party members, were said to have been sighted on the network television (during live coverage of the event) freely voting,” it added.
According to the committee, “it is a matter of grave concern that the accreditation process appeared to have been manipulated. A situation where non-delegates, and in some cases, non-party members openly confessed on the television (Channels TV) of having been hired from the streets to rig for a particular candidate (who eventually emerged as a winner), casts serious doubts on the credibility of the process.”
It added: “Equally disturbing is the public perception of the primary. There have been so many negative reports on this exercise all over the print, electronic and social media. On Friday, September 9, an accredited domestic observer group faulted the conduct of the primary by citing some irregularities at the accreditation centre. The observers made public mention of the following: that the accreditation of delegates was “hastily done,” that many delegates were given “unstamped tags,” that , in some cases, tinted buses were used to convey delegates to the voting centre.
“The observer group also pointed out some discrepancies between total delegates accredited and total votes cast. With a total accredited delegates of 2, 754 and a total of seven votes cancelled, they wondered how the total votes cast ended up being 2, 774 (i.e. more than the total votes cast and total invalid votes combined).
“The above revelation, is to say the least, quite embarrassing and totally unacceptable. Apart from stigmatizing the primary, it has also put a dent on the party’s credibility. A party founded on a platform of due process and which prides itself with zero tolerance for corruption and fraud, cannot be seen to condone illegality.”
The panel made five recommendations, based on its findings. The suggestions were:
-The election result should be cancelled.
-A re-run election should be ordered immediately to beat the INEC’s deadline
-The party headquarters should consider reverting to the earlier delegates’ list, which was distributed to aspirants when they came to Abuja, shortly before the primaries.
-A final/properly harmonised delegates’, acceptable to all parties concerned, should be compiled after elections.
-Delegates’ list should not as a policy be released too late, i.e. on the eve of elections, but earlier, in order to give sufficient time for the smooth take-off of elections and avoid being used in favour of one aspirant.
According to the panel, although there was substantial compliance in the conduct of the primary, “serious and weighty identified irregularities,” cannot be ignored. It said: “in view of the change mantra of this administration, it is pertinent that the party blazes the trail by refusing to condone a less than perfect exercise.”
Two weeks ago, it was evident that the work of the committee was in vain. Its suggestion that the results should be cancelled to pave the way for a fresh primary fell on deaf ears. A media report suggesting that the APC National Legal Adviser, Dr. Muiz Banire (SAN), counselled the party against the nullification of the result sparked off a fresh controversy. The legal luminary has since clarified that it was unnecessary to link him with the crisis, stressing that no incongruous advice emanated from him.
Oke said although the Appeal Committee was a fact-finding panel and not strictly a court of law, its decision cannot be waived aside on rhetoric and strict legalism. He faulted the alleged memo by Banire. he said the committee, not the legal adviser, was in a better position to assess the documents, witnesses and the evidence tendered. He rejected the notion of substantial compliance, saying that it cannot be pleaded in the face of weighty allegations of compromise which rendered the primary invalid. Oke also dismissed argument about the waste of time and resources to justify the position that the Appeal Panel’s Report should be rejected. He said: “The issue of integrity and credibility of our party on trial in this matter far outweighs the appeal to emotion, time and resources. If the primary was not credible, it should remain unacceptable. The APC cannot be seen to be condoning any form of corruption.”
Objecting to the purported memo, Abraham urged the NWC to, in the interest of justice and the good electoral fortune of the party in Ondo State, disregard the mischievous and untenable conclusions reached by the National Legal Officer. “This amounts to an armchair adjudication and recreational commentary on the work carried out by a constitutional arm of the party that sat, examined the petitions and witnesses and came to a reasoned conclusion,” he said.
The aspirant added: “Giving effect to the submissions of the National Legal officer would amount to constituting the National Legal Officer into another appellate institution with powers to overrule duly constituted organs of the party. This is not the intention of the constitution of our great party.”
Also, Boroffice said it was dangerous for the party leadership to ignore the petitions. He reminded the APC leadership that courts have often decided against beneficiaries of flawed primaries in their historic judgments on pre-election matters. He counselled against technical justice or miscarriage of justice, adding that, to forestall the possibility of a court action, it is in the interest of the party to provide substantial justice for all petitioners by cancelling the fraudulent primary. In his letter to Odigie-Oyegun, he stressed: “The whole world is watching how this Ondo imbroglio will be handled by the NWC. This borders on the integrity and honesty of the party organ.”
The rejection of the Appeal Panel’s report has upset many party chieftains. The National Leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, chided Odigie-Oyegun for escalating the crisis through his affirmation of the disputed results, contrary to the panel’s report. He called for a change of party leadership , saying that the national chairman should quit.
He said the party was under “critical threat” by its leadership, following its neglect of the principles of democratic fairness and justice, which ought to guide its internal deliberations. The former Lagos State governor said: “Oyegun’s transgression are a warning….To rescue the party, Oyegun must go.”
A chieftain, Olu Akinola, said the rejection of the report was embarrassing to the Ondo APC family. “We are protesting to the APC National Executive Committee and the Presidency so that they can wade in,” added the lawyer.
Many observers believe that the disputed candidate, Akeredolu, is not a unifying factor. If he has initiated reconciliation, it has not resulted into a truce.
After the primary, a former member of the House of Assembly, Hon. Tolu Babaleye, had warned that the party may risk defection, if there is no opportunity for the redress of the injustice. At the weekend, fears were rife that the party may be decimated in Ondo State. Party sources said that some aggrieved aspirants have opened discussion with some parties. “There is still room for the substitution of candidates. If popular candidates are edged out, they will take refuse in other parties,” said a chieftain.
Abraham has declared himself winner, based on the report of the panel. “His supporters feel that the irregularities highlighted by the Appeal Panel show that the APC does not have an authentic candidate yet,” said a chieftain.
A chieftain from Iju/Ita-ogbolu axis, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said: “The battle may shift to the court. I can confirm to you that, if the national leadership fails to do the right thing, aggrieved people are willing and ready to seek judicial intervention.”
To prevent any awful consequence, three national leaders, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Senator Ibrahim Abu and Evangelist Bamidele Olumilua, former governor of old Ondo State, have urged the NWC to rescind its decision on the ratification of the controversial result.
Olumilua said there is the need for the troubled Ondo chapter to go for the governorship poll as a united body. He doubted if there is harmony in the party, judging by the post-primary acrimony.
Abubakar, the Turakin Adamawa, said a feeling of injustice could do utter damage to the party at this critical time, urging the party leadership to wade into the imbroglio by redressing the perceived wrongs and injustice.
Abu, a senator from Niger State, said the result can still be reversed, chiding the national chairman for not submitting a temporary name to the INEC so that the party could avail itself of the opportunity for substitution later. “The decision can still be reversed,” he maintained.
