Felix Morka, the National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress, emphasized the distinction between the current challenges facing Dr. Abdullahi Ganduje, the party’s National Chairman, and the events that led to the ouster of the Adams Oshiomhole-led National Working Committee from the party headquarters.
Airing his views on Ganduje’s suspension on Arise TV, Morka pointed out that Oshiomhole and the former NWC members were elected for a four-year term (2018-2022) during a national convention in Abuja.
However, the party leadership was dissolved two years into their tenure, with allegations that it was aimed at thwarting Bola Tinubu’s presidential aspirations, according to former acting APC chairman Ntufam Eta.
In March 2020, a Federal High Court in the Federal Capital Territory ordered Oshiomhole to step aside following an interlocutory injunction seeking his removal as APC National Chairman.
Justice Danlami Senchi ruled that Oshiomhole should be suspended pending the resolution of the case and criticized the party for retaining him as chairman after his suspension by the Edo state APC chapter in November 2019.
Responding to concerns that Ganduje could face a similar fate, Morka insisted that the situations were dissimilar.
He pointed out that unlike Oshiomhole’s case, those advocating for Ganduje’s suspension were not officially recognized members of the party.
Morka stated, “No, the comparison does not hold when you examine the specifics of Oshiomhole’s situation. They are completely different. During Oshiomhole’s tenure as national chairman, the individuals involved in his suspension and other actions were party officials.
“At that time, no one questioned the legitimacy of these individuals as party officers. Whether their actions were influenced, coerced, or voluntary is a separate discussion, and I won’t delve into that. But they were party members.
“In Kano, those advocating for Ganduje’s suspension are not party officials. The person who announced the suspension stated at the party headquarters that he did not authorize anyone to go to court against the national chairman. So, if the publicly known individual denies involvement, who filed the case? That is the question.
“The disparity lies in having unauthorized individuals proclaiming the suspension of our national chairman and attempting to validate this illegal act in court. It is crucial to highlight that these individuals lack the authority and are not acting on behalf of the party. They need to cease because there will be repercussions for such misconduct once the dust settles.”