The leadership of Labour Party on Wednesday said the absence of officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission at the March 27 national convention does not invalidate the election that returned its National Chairman, Julius Abure, and members of the National Working Committee to office.
This was disclosed by the National Legal Adviser of LP, Kehinde Edun, at the party’s secretariat in Abuja.
Edun’s statement comes three days after INEC announced that none of its officials attended or monitored proceedings at the disputed convention held at Nnewi, Anambra State.
In the past four months, Abure has been at loggerheads with the Nigeria Labour Congress over the legitimacy of his re-election.
The party’s internal rift remains unresolved as the NLC and its stakeholders continue to distance themselves from the current NWC.
The situation escalated further when INEC responded to a request by a lawyer for a Certified True Copy of its report on the convention and the party’s constitution.
In the letter referenced INEC/DEPM/LP/CTC/885/1 dated July 18 and signed by Acting Secretary, Haliru Aminu, the commission declared that it couldn’t report on the convention because it did not monitor it.
The letter, which was sighted by The According, partly read, “The commission has received your request for the Certified True Copy of the monitored report of the Labour Party convention at Nnewi, Anambra State, held on the 27th of March 2024, and the Labour Party constitution.
“The Certified True Copy of the Labour Party Constitution has been forwarded to your firm earlier.
“Regrettably, the commission did not monitor the Labour Party Convention of 27th March 2024 and cannot therefore report on the convention.”
The position of the electoral umpire has since led to a chain reaction, with the NLC insisting that it has been vindicated.
But addressing newsmen in Abuja on Wednesday, Edun said the INEC letter was wrongly interpreted.
According to the national legal adviser, the presence or absence of INEC officials does not any affect the legitimacy of the national convention.
He said, “On the deliberate misinterpretation of INEC’s reply to an application by Messr Steve Adehi, SAN & Co, this letter is very clear and unambiguous and shouldn’t have been the subject of any argument. However not finding anything to hold against us, they went to import what is not contained in the letter into it. The applicant (an agent of the NLC) requested for the CTC of INEC to monitor the report of the Labour party convention 2024 and the constitution. Even though the applicant and his principal were dishonest, mischievous, dubious, and manipulative, INEC’s response was accurate and unpretentious.
“How on earth could there be an INEC monitored report when we have made it clear that INEC did not attend, a position also confirmed by INEC and is in the public domain. The NLC and its cronies including the applicant knew INEC didn’t attend. Why then ask for the INEC report and what is their business with it?
“In paragraph 3 of the INEC’s response, the commission expressed regret that it did not monitor the convention and could therefore not have an INEC-monitored report. Now, did the non-attendance of INEC invalidate the convention? The answer is capital no and INEC never said so. The law did not make it mandatory for INEC to attend any party’s convention. INEC knew they were at liberty to come or not. What the law requires is proper notice. Take note that the law did not say the failure of INEC to attend shall render the convention invalid. What then is the essence of the dishonest, dubious, and misconceived hue and cry by the NLC?”
Continuing, the party counsel warned that it can’t be intimidated or cowed by any external aggressor and wouldn’t fold it hands to watch the party being hijacked.
