Senators defection to APC

Emmanuel Onyedi Wingate Esq , a practicing Lawyer writes SL

I have tried not to comment on the cross-carpeting of PDP  legislators to the APC mainly because I have been so busy and is not interested in useless research. However, page 12 of today's Guardian suggests that the Senator defectors rely on the proviso to s. 68 (1) (g) CFRN which permits membership of a party different from that which is the platform of election on grounds "...of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored." This assumption is not largely tenable for the following reasons:
1. The first leg presupposes that two parties emerge from the same party and the defector is a member of one of these two parties. This is not the case in the present situation. APC is a totally different party and did not emerge from the PDP;

2. The second leg provides for a situation where (a) the party is factionalized and one of the now separated factions of which the defector is a member merges with another party or (b) the party itself merges with another party and ceases to exist.

The second case is a bit tricky but again this is not the case with at least the PDP Senators. It has to be shown that the faction belonged to an existent and recognized PDP faction which then merged with another party. If the first group of defectors comprising governors et all could be said to be a faction which then merged with the APC, which is doubtful, the Senators and many other legislators who have since been singly defecting to the APC would not be said to belong to that faction because as soon as they purportedly merged, they ceased being a faction of the PDP and became members of the rival APC so that any further defections, save if they could be constituted further factions of the PDP are defections simplicity of members of the PDP to a rival party.

The Courts would therefore be clearly guided by first determining the constitution of a party faction. It is submitted that a faction of a party would at least mirror the party itself by strength of membership, organization and recognition. It is inconceivable that the Constitution intended that 3 members of a party with membership running into millions will constitute themselves a faction. It should be recalled that fictionalization of a party has far-reaching implications such as recognition by INEC, determination of its authentic candidates etc. Finally, it is important for purposes of certainty in the law, to call to mind the now preponderant ratio of our highest Courts, that votes of the electorate are cast for political parties.

Do you agree with him?