11th February, 2023
By Kingsley Okoye
Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani, the senator representing Enugu-East in the National Assembly has faulted his purported suspension by the National Working Committee (NWC) of the PDP.
The PDP had earlier suspended Nnamani for supporting Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the presidential candidate of the opposition All Progressives Congress, APC.
Despite the suspension, Nnamani had insisted on support for Tinubu instead of Atiku Abubakar,
the presidential candidate of PDP. The Senator had anchored his support on his belief that Nigeria’s next president should come from Southern Nigeria.
However, the NWC of PDP announced the expulsion of Nnamani, and six others from the party on Friday.
The party, in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba, identified others expelled from the party as Chris Ogbu (Imo State), Ajijola Oladimeji (Ekiti Central), Olayinka Olalere (Ekiti Central II), Fayose John (Ekiti Central I), Akerele Oluyinka (Ekiti North I) and Emiola Adenike Jennifer (Ekiti South II).
According to him, the PDP members were expelled for anti-party activities and other grave offences in violation of the Constitution of the PDP (as amended in 2017).
He added that their expulsion were also approved by the NEC of the party at it 66th meeting on Friday.
“The decision of the NWC is sequel to the recommendation of the National Disciplinary Committee and pursuant to Sections 58 and 59 (1)(g) of the PDP Constitution (as amended in 2017).’’
But Nnamani in a statement issued few hours after the announcement accused the NWC of failure to follow due process and strict compliance with the provisions of the PDP constitution in expelling him.
Nnamani further argued on why the PDP NWC lacked the powers to suspend or expel him as a member of the National Assembly in the letter to the body through his counsel, Olusegun O. Jolaawo,SAN.
He argued that only the INEC of PDP has the power to suspend him.
He quoted copiously the relevant sections of the PDP constitution allegedly breached by the NWC.
“Article 57(7): “Notwithstanding any other provision relating to discipline, no Executive Committee at any level, except the National Executive Committee, shall entertain any question of discipline as may or concern a member of the National Executive Committee.
Furthermore, “Deputy Governors or members of the National Assembly, provided that nothing in this constitution shall preclude or invalidate any complaint submitted through the National Working Committee to the National Executive Committee concerning any person whatsoever”.
Acccording to him, “Article 59(3) stated that: “Notwithstanding any other provision of this constitution relating to discipline, no Executive Committee at any level, except the National Executive Committee, shall entertain any question of discipline relating or concerning a member of the National Executive Committee.
Such members include President, Vice President, Governors, Deputy Governors, Ministers, Ambassadors, Special Advisers or member of any of the legislative houses.
“ On Jan 20, the NWC conducted preliminary disciplinary hearing against our client and approved his suspension from the party for one month, purportedly acting pursuant to Article 57(3) of the Constitution of the PDP.
“It is evident on the basis of Articles 57(7) and 59(3) of the Constitution of your party that no organ of the party, including the National Working Committee, has the competence to entertain any question of discipline against our client, except the National Executive Committee of the party.
He stated that the purported “proceeding of the National Working Committee of the party held on Jan 20 and the decision reached there at, suspending our client from the party is null and void.
” Our client was neither invited to the meeting nor given the opportunity to be heard before the decision against him was taken.
“See Article 57(6) of the Constitution of your party; the National Working Committee lacks the requisite powers to entertain any question of discipline against our client to the extent of suspending or expelling him from the party.
“The proceeding and decision reached at the meeting of the National Working Committee of your party which was held on Jan 20 is therefore, both illegal and a nullity.
“It therefore gives us great concern, that your proposed disciplinary hearing of Feb 8, 2023 as stated in your letter of 1st Feb is built and erected on the illegal and invalid meeting and decision taken by the National Working Committee of your Party.
“Your letter to our client dated 1st Feb made it abundantly clear that the complaint against our client was made to your committee by the National Working Committee.
He said by virtue of the proviso to Article 57(7) of the constitution, the National Working Committee was required to complain on any disciplinary matter against a member of NASS, only to the National Executive Committee of the Party.
Your committee had not claimed to be the National Executive Committee of the PDP and in fact, is not.
“Your committee therefore, has no powers under the constitution of the party, to entertain or hear any question of discipline against our client as he is a member of the National Assembly.
“Only a properly constituted National Executive Committee of the party can entertain such question of discipline against him.
“ We therefore, urge you to reconsider your proposed disciplinary hearing against our client and abort it immediately.
” We have only requested your committee to comply strictly with the clear provisions of the constitution of the party under which you claim to be proceeding.
” Your proposed disciplinary hearing of Feb. 8 is wholly erected on illegality and your committee equally has no powers under the constitution of the party to invite our client for the purpose of entertaining any disciplinary matter against him.”
(NAN)