APC's Candidate Swap: What Then Is the Purpose of Party Primaries?

By Njideka Maduka 


The anyhowness is just too much. You need to see or hear it to believe it.

Vanguard newspaper reported this morning that the All Progressives Congress (APC) has replaced 26 candidates who emerged from the party's recent primaries with other candidates.

One of the biggest casualties is former Benue State Governor, Gabriel Suswam. According to the report, the development is linked to what it described as "the battle for the control of Benue State between the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator George Akume, and Governor Hyacinth Alia."

So, Suswam was sacrificed to please Akume, a top APC leader told Vanguard.

The report also suggested that part of the decision was aimed at returning greater control of the party structures in the states to the governors. 

Recall that President Bola Tinubu had earlier given the governors of the APC in the different states power to be in charge of primaries in their respective states. Now, having conducted the primaries, you would think that the governors would have used their power to influence things and ensure that their preferred aspirants emerged winners.

 But, no.  

From today's report, it does appear that that was not what happened. And that is why we are now learning that no less than 26 senatorial and House of Representatives candidates were replaced. And now they said they were replaced based on recommendations of the APC Primary Election Appeal Committee. 

What Does this Mean For Democracy? 

So the question I should be asking is, what did the APC appeal committee recommend as the reason for replacing those candidates? Was it that the ones whose names were submitted won the election or that they were chosen because the governors simply wanted them? Because make it make sense. What is the purpose of primaries if people who contested and won are now being replaced by the party? 

By the new electoral act, parties had the chance of choosing either the direct or consensus mode of primary. So if we're hearing things like this, it raises the question of the essence of primary elections, and even elections as a whole when we have impunity playing out?

What does this spell for our democracy?

And where is the place of INEC in all of these things? Because if INEC monitored these primaries, surely they should have a say as to who they saw emerge from those primaries. And the casualties, or should I say the candidates who have  become casualties, can they challenge this in court, and are they willing to challenge this in court? If they can, wouldn't it be nice to see it? Because we need to understand the whole essence of democracy if people are not allowed to make their choice and their choice count. Hopefully the affected persons can take this up and call INEC as witness so that we'll get to the bottom of this.


Driving the Conversation... Making Sense of the News 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Making Sense Of The ADC Coalition

Rivers State Emergency Rule. What Did the Supreme Court Actually Say?

Oil Politics, PIA, and the Power Shift We’re Not Talking About