PDP Zoning Policy Not Enforceable - Court

ABUJA, Dec 01, 2010, (THEWILL) - A Federal Capital Territory High Court today took a swipe at the zoning and rotation arrangement of the Peoples Democratic party (PDP), declaring it totally unenforceable. The Chief Judge of the FCT, Justice Lawal Gumi in his judgment said that: “The provision of Article 7.2 [c] of the 1st Defendant’s Constitution 2009 as amended recognizes the principle of zoning and rotation of party and public elective offices.” The Judge also ruled that said the article is subsisting and binding on the party, its organs and members even as he said that: " I am unable to make a declaration that the north is entitled to bear the presidential ticket of the 1st defendant for two consecutive terms 2007 and 2011 respectively as the south did in 1999 and 2003, same being a political question and therefore not justifiable.” Justice Gumi also turned down a request to make a pronouncement that PDP will be in breach of its constitution if it sponsors a southern presidential aspirant where the north has not finished its two terms as the PDP did not provide for such arrangements where no such breach has occurred.

“Though Article 7.2[c] recognizes zoning and rotation. It is an internal matter for the party to determine and decide how and where the zoning should be done.” Gumi said, “Compelling a political party to sponsor a candidate from a particular zone is obviously an act of delving into the internal affairs of the party." Justice Gumi approved the general principle that the court should respect the independence of parties in matters that are strictly the internal affairs of the party, adding that if a party’s constitution makes a provision as to how its affairs should be run, it must be run in that direction, stressing that the court is duty bound to ensure that the party complies with its constitutional requirement. The court also decided that for the court to therefore give an order that only candidate from a particular zone should be sponsored where the Constitution of the PDP has not so defined terms and conditions is an invitation for the court to delve into internal affairs of the party.

THEWILL recalls that the plaintiff Sani Dutsinma brought the suit through an originating summon requesting the court for “A declaration that Article7.2[c] of the 1st defendants constitution2009 as amended is subsisting and binding on the party its organs and members” and also “A declaration that the north is entitle to bear the presidential ticket of the 1st defendant for two consecutive terms 2007 and 20011 respectively as the south did in 1999& 2003.”

The plaintiff also sought “An order compelling the defendants its organs and members to respect the provision of Article7.2[c] of the 1st defendants constitution as amended 2n 2009 by sponsoring a northern Nigerian presidential aspirant in 2007 presidential election.”