By John Mayaki<\/p>\n
An article on StearsBusiness defined a primary election as “a
\nmini-election where a political party elects its preferred candidate to
\nrun for public office under its platform.” The article, titled
\nExplainer: What are Direct and Indirect Primary Elections, went ahead to
\nexplain that “during primaries, parties go through an elimination
\nprocess where they trim down a pool of nominees to just one person who
\nwill represent them at the general polls.”<\/p>\n
In Edo State, the gubernatorial election is coming up on September 19,
\nand various political parties are required to provide one candidate,
\neach, who will represent them in the polls. By the virtue of this
\nrequirement, and the fact that the date of the election is drawing
\nclose, political parties are setting the stage for their primaries. For
\nthe All Progressives Congress, the incumbent party in Edo State, there
\nis an even more urgent need to elect the ultimate candidate as soon as
\npossible, and then focus on retaining political leadership in the state.<\/p>\n
However, primary elections are, in type and form, divided into two.
\nDirect and Indirect Primary Election.\u00a0 Direct primary election consist
\nof the whole registered members of a party, just like in general
\nelections, participating in selecting the party’s candidate through
\ncasting votes. Whereas indirect primary is achieved through party
\nmembers electing “delegates who in turn elect the party’s candidate on
\ntheir behalf.”<\/p>\n
For Edo APC, there may be a conflict on which method to employ. However,
\nwith the existing peculiar circumstance of the COVID-19, a certain
\nmethod emerges favorable.<\/p>\n
The indirect primary system, in the convergence of delegates, will need
\nto congregate about 5,000 people in a closed space, for the purpose of
\nelecting a party candidate on behalf of the people and the whole
\nregistered members of the party. Contrary to this, the direct primary
\nmethod will allow proper franchise for all members of the party, in
\ntheir districts and units, to participate in the process.<\/p>\n
The statistical assumption derives from the 2016 primary election when
\nthe indirect method was last used before the ultimate adoption of the
\ndirect method in the previous convention. The 2016 indirect primary
\nfeatured over 4000 delegates. But the stated figure excludes independent
\nobservers, journalists, and academics interested in the process. When
\nadded, the figure rises slightly above 5000, all of them herded in a
\nspace that closely knit the bodies of participants.<\/p>\n
To repeat such in the face of existing realities is to commit suicide.
\nIt is a deliberate tethering of the people at the brinks of explosive
\ndanger. And that is why the arguments for indirect primary election
\nemploys a logic that is flatly impotent and self-defeating. Those making
\nthe argument claim that the indirect primary is better in attempting to
\navoid the spread of the virus, yet they neglect the fact that the virus
\nbreeds and spreads faster in packed and enclosed spaces–the exact
\nmethod that the indirect primary will operate with.<\/p>\n
To complete the gruesome picture, some of these delegates who are to
\nplay vital roles in an indirect primary setting are scattered all over
\nthe country. To have them move at the moment will not only breach the
\nexisting lockdown laws but as well put the state at the risk of
\nimporting vectors. Worse, these out-of-state delegates will on the day
\nof the primary election, interact with people already on the ground and
\nrelatively secure. In any case of transmission, the virus will go far
\nand wide, seeing persons even in the rural areas–which has until now
\nbeen safe–put at risk of infection. This will begin a new wave of
\ninfection and spread, one growing down to top, from our weakest spots in
\nthe state’s health system.<\/p>\n
The direct primary method, however, will decongest people and protocol,
\nhaving the process done in an open place and a dispersed manner where
\nparty members can easily observe the social distancing and other
\npreventive measures. When cut down to basic units, we arrive at the best
\nand most workable formula. Currently, there is no unit in Edo State with
\nover 200 registered APC members. And, without any form of doubt, it is
\neasy to regulate 200 individuals, applying globally administered
\npreventive measures, than it is with a figure staggeringly over 5000.<\/p>\n
More so, for an aspirant like the incumbent Governor Godwin Obaseki who
\nlay claims to great popularity following self-proclaimed successes in
\npolicies that have purportedly transformed the lives of all, including
\nmembers of the party, a direct primary offers a good opportunity to put
\nthe popularity to the test.<\/p>\n
In addition to the foregoing, there is a legal perspective to the
\ndilemma. Every political party has a structure upon which it operates.
\nThey equally have laws that regulate their actions and operation. In the
\nparticular case of the APC, the party, drawing from experiences in the
\npast, has established a system with national effect in matters regarding
\nprimary elections.<\/p>\n
Article 13. 4(V) of the APC Constitution gives the National Working
\nCommittee power to propose regulation to the National Executive
\nCommittee of the party for the conduct of the primary and this also
\nincludes the mode to be adopted. It was in the exercise of this duty
\nthat the NEC adopted the direct mode of primary for in selecting the
\nparty’s flagbearer for the Edo State Governorship election. This
\ndecision of NWC is binding on the state executives of the party in the
\nconduct of the Edo State APC primary. It will amount to illegality for
\nthe state executives, or any other body, to now adopt the indirect mode.<\/p>\n
Such illegality breeds conflict. These conflicts lead to the emergence
\nof various candidates acquired from varied primary elections among party
\nfactions within a state. And, eventually, matters end in court. The
\nwhole back-and-forth damages the party’s reputation, reducing its
\npopularity and acceptance in the larger population of people. At the
\nextreme, the opposition party benefits from the conflict, having the
\npeople or the court voting or ruling in their favor. Clearly, this is
\nnot what Edo APC wants.<\/p>\n
Examples of legal rulings establish the authority of the National
\nWorking Committee of the All Progressives Congress in deciding matters
\nof party processes – especially as it relates with the method of
\nelecting representatives in elections – abounds.<\/p>\n
A precedent can be found in the case involving Hon. Peter Akpatason and
\nRt. Hon. Kabiru Adjoto last year when Justice Kekere-Ekun while awarding
\nvictory to Hon. Akpatason at the Supreme Court ruled categorically and
\nauthoritatively that: “Any primary election conducted by the State
\nExecutive of a party has been held to be illegal.”<\/p>\n
More recently, in the case between the APC and Engineer Suleiman Aluyi
\nPere earlier this year, Justice of the Supreme Court, Rhodes-Vivour
\nruled that: “Candidates are expected to obtain expression of interest
\nand nomination forms, present their certificates for verification and
\nappear before a screening committee. This is the stage at which the
\ndomestic or internal affairs of the political party are not justiciable.
\nThe courts will not dabble into how a member of the party is screened,
\nor why a member was not cleared by the party to contest the primaries.
\nPut in another way, before a member of the party is cleared, the party
\nhas the power to disqualify their member, and is answerable to no one
\nincluding the courts. A dissatisfied member’s remedy is to leave the
\nparty and seek his political ambitions somewhere else.”<\/p>\n
Justice Rhodes-Vivour’s ruling makes clear the fact that only two
\nchoices are available to any member when faced with a decision from the
\nAPC NWC on methods of electing election representatives: to either
\ncomply with it or exit the APC for another party if dissatisfied with
\nthe prescribed method. Nowhere does it say parallel elections can be
\nheld and imposed on the party’s national organ.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, for a state like Edo where the sitting governor, through
\nmultiple shreds of evidence, has shown his determination to foist
\nhimself on the people and the party, there are more reasons to be afraid
\nand skeptical of the indirect form of primary election, which his
\nsupport group, is prescribing for Edo State APC. Citing again the
\naforementioned article, indirect primaries “has been criticized for
\nbeing easier to manipulate by party leaders and delegates.” It becomes
\nclear, therefore, why Governor Godwin Obaseki is adamant about employing
\nthe indirect primary method.<\/p>\n
Ultimately, if those who make the argument for an indirect primary
\nelection have their way, especially in the guise of protecting the
\npeople from coronavirus, what then would be done in the general
\ngubernatorial polls in the state? Are there also indirect elections – a
\nmethod of voting that will determine who will be the governor without
\nthe people themselves voting? This makes a better argument for direct
\nprimaries as it will even help the Independent National Electoral
\nCommission to rehearse and prepare itself adequately for applying the
\nsocial distancing measures in the bigger gubernatorial election.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
By John Mayaki An article on StearsBusiness defined a primary election as “a mini-election where a political party elects its preferred candidate to run for public office under its platform.”…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":43081,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-73640","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articles-opinions"],"yoast_head":"\n