Adams Oshiomhole
The national chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Adams
Oshiomhole, said every member of the party’s national working committee
(NWC) must take directive from him.
According to a report by TheCable, in an internal memo addressed to
the party chairman, Babatunde Ogala, national legal adviser of the
party, accused Oshiomhole of usurping his office, adding that the
national chairman is fond of sidelining the party’s legal department.
He alleged that Oshiomhole had refused to consult him over issues his office should handle.
In a swift reaction while speaking in an interview with Daily
Trust, Oshiomhole said the constitution of the party provides that he is
the chief executive officer (CEO) of the APC.
He said: “We have a constitution. It’s very clear that nobody
is an island to himself or herself. Yes, we have 21 elected members of
the NWC. We constitute an organ.
“It is not 21 NWCs, it’s one, and the duties and
responsibilities of the chairman are well-stated. Among others, it
provides that the chairman is the chief executive officer (CEO) of the
party. He is also the chief accounting officer.
“The word CEO has the same meaning everywhere in the world. The
fact that you are the head of a department or a division, or a unit,
does not isolate you from taking a directive from the CEO.
“So, if there is anyone, including a legal adviser, who thinks
that he is running a different system that is not accountable to the
internal structures and power and control within the party, the
challenge may be his.
“But again, those are all part of the distractions. What
happens in government and some organisations is that if you don’t pay
attention to some minute areas, they become the entry point for
opponents to infiltrate and create maximum damage. What are the issues?
The right to nominate who represents us, the right to be consulted.
“If I am taken to court as national chairman, and my name is
mentioned, or they just write national chairman and write All
Progressives Congress, common sense should ask, should I have the right
to be informed and to approve who represents the party in a lawsuit? Why
would anybody want to monopolise that? For me it’s straightforward.
“I have seen ridiculous situations in which people who took our
party to court come to me to say, ‘Allow me to nominate the person
who’ll represent the APC’ so that they are guaranteed of the outcome of
the case.
“I cannot oblige such a request, and if insisting that the
right thing is done leads to internal memos that some choose to publish,
my eye is on the ball, to protect the corporate interest of the APC.”