Abuja, Nigeria
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said it has not decided on the leadership crisis rocking the Labour Party (LP).
Rotimi Oyekanmi, chief press secretary (CPS) to the INEC chairman, who stated on Thursday, that any report on reinstating Abure led leadership of the party was false and misleading.
He stated that the report also falsely implied that INEC had reinstated a certain individual as the National Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), citing information from the commission’s official website.
“Our attention has been drawn to some media reports claiming that the Commission has recognised certain persons as the National Chairman and National Secretary of the Labour Party (LP),” the statement reads.
“The reports also inferred that the Commission has restored a particular individual as the National Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), referring to the listings on the Commission’s official website.
“However, the reports are false and misleading. The Commission has not made any decision in respect of either the LP or PDP.
“The names of the National Officers of the LP had previously been uploaded to our website following a court order, not related in any way to the latest judgement of the Supreme Court. In the same manner, the name of the National Secretary of the PDP on the same website was neither deleted nor reinstated.
“As a law-abiding institution, the Commission is carefully studying the judgement of the Supreme Court on the Labour Party and will communicate its decision to the public in due course.”
Last month, the Supreme Court sacked Abure and his executive team.
The Labour Party (LP) has been mired in a leadership crisis, with Abure and his faction on one side and the caretaker committee led by Nenadi Usman on the other, both asserting claims to the party’s leadership.
In its ruling, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to affirm Abure as LP chairman, noting that the core issue pertained to the party’s internal leadership dispute.
The court maintained that leadership matters are internal affairs of political parties and therefore fall outside the jurisdiction of the judiciary.
