The ugly happenings in the major political parties in our country, Nigeria, in recent times, particularly in the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) have once again brought to the fore the unending argument concerning which should take precedence, party interests or individual members’ interests; and concerning the decision of goals to pursue, is it the party’s decision that is supreme or that of the individual members?
These questions have been brought to the front burner by the current acrimonies arising from the party primaries to select candidates for the coming general elections.
Since the conclusion of the primaries and nomination of candidates, there have been accusations and counter accusations of impunity, imposition of candidates, and manipulation of primary election results among others.
In this regard, three particularly controversial cases involving Ogun, Ondo and Imo States come readily to mind. These cases which are yet to be amicably resolved even up to the present moment, had led to some vitriolic verbal exchanges between the governors of the afore-mentioned states on the one hand and their party chairmen and the NWC on the other hand.
Both Imo and Ogun Governors were angry because the individuals they personally preferred to succeed them as governors of their respective states were not the people eventually nominated by the NWC. A similar scenario also played out in Ondo State where the people that emerged as the National Assembly candidates as proclaimed by the national party leadership were not the people in the good books of the Governor.
It is these matters that had generated the current misunderstanding between the governors and the APC national leadership. What the disagreements boil down to is the basic question as to who has the final authority on who flies the party flag in an election, the state leadership as represented by the Governor or national leadership of the party; party supremacy or individual powerful members’ supremacy?
These are the knotty issues that the APC or any political party at all, must resolve in order to move forward confidently. On the face of it, the issues appear simple and straight-forward enough for easy resolution, but that is the case only where there are no entrenched personal interests that are benefiting from the status quo that the party national leadership is trying to correct.
In these matters, opinions concerning them must not be based on sentiments or popular refrains, rather, one must try as much as possible to subject the issues involved to objective analysis before expressing views one way or the other.
From some of the opinions frequently expressed in the media concerning the idea of party supremacy, it is easy for the unwary to run away with the wrong impression that the idea is dysfunctional and that it is the main problem of our party organization and politics.
Such a view is absolutely wrong, and it can indeed be said that the concept of party supremacy is the cornerstone of party politics and without which a political party will be nothing but a rowdy crowd or a mob.
In order to properly appreciate the necessity of the concept of party supremacy, one must first realise what a political party is and its roles in the socio-political evolution and development of a polity.
A political party is a legally constituted group of people attracted and glued together by a common political ideology and common group objectives, which the members had agreed to jointly pursue and realise in the polity in which the group exists.
And as we all know, for any group at all whether social, economic or political, to achieve its stated objectives, the group interests must override the personal and individual interests of the members. This must be necessarily so, otherwise, members of the group are bound to be working at cross purposes to the detriment of the group.
Apart from this issue of superior group interest, there is also the equally important need to select a group leader to direct the affairs of the group on behalf of members in such a way that the group interests do not suffer and stated objectives are also accomplished.
In this regard, the group leader elected or appointed must be one who has strong faith in the ideology of the group and the group objectives flowing there from.
In addition, he must have the strength of character to pursue the group interests without minding whose ox is gored and the personal integrity to avoid putting his own personal interests above those of the group which he leads. And once the group leader fulfills his leadership requirements, whatever decisions he takes concerning the affairs of the group must necessarily override any decision taken by any member of the group.
We have gone to this length in exploring the theory of group effectiveness to enable us appreciate the soundness of the concept of party supremacy.
The PDP and APC are nothing but political groups which had been formed to pursue some political objectives. If they intend to achieve their objectives, then their organisations must be based on solid theoretical foundations, failing which they would remain mere ineffective assemblages of individuals pretending to be political parties.
In Nigerian political history, we once had examples of effective, strong and powerful political parties which our current parties of today can usefully emulate.
In the First Republic, the Action Group of Nigeria, popularly called the AG, was widely regarded as the best organised political party on the African continent at the time.
The AG ably led by the legendary Chief Obafemi Awolowo was distinguished by stringent party discipline and strong, unquestionable leadership. Any doubt of the excellence of that party is automatically erased by the unparalleled accomplishments of the Western Regional Government formed by the party.
It is also noteworthy that the Unity Party of Nigeria, UPN, of the Second Republic, led by the same personality, exhibited the same qualities of discipline, cohesion and strong leadership. And so it was that among the five states controlled by the party (Ondo, Oyo, Ogun, Lagos and Bendel) no state deviated from the four cardinal programmes of the party.
The party’s cardinal programmes were: free education, free health services, full and gainful employment and integrated rural development. The programmes were religiously implemented by the states in accordance with the individual state’s capabilities.
If truth be told, the present socio-economic position of the West today in the Nigerian scheme of things is never by happenstance; it is the cumulative effects of past distinguished leadership in party and government.
Thus, a political party populated mainly by ambitious and self-centred politicians who are ready and willing to sacrifice party interests at the altar of personal ambition, can never achieve its political objectives talk less of catering to the welfare of the people.
We need not go far to illustrate this important point. The violation of the principle of party supremacy has been the bane of the current APC – led Federal Government and the genesis of the difficulties being encountered by the Buhari administration.
We recollect how Bukola Saraki and his rebellious group defied the decision of their party in order to fulfill his personal ambition of becoming the Senate President. He did not only jeopardise the integrity of his party (APC) by so doing, but he also traded away the Senate Deputy Presidency to the opposition party (PDP).
Since that singular perfidious action of an unpatriotic party member, things have never been the same with the party. Just consider the influence of that personality on Buhari’s fight against corruption and the negative impact of the Senate on the Federal Government’s policies and programmes.
With this example which is well-known to all of us, do we need any further argument for the absolute necessity for party supremacy?
It is only fitting to conclude with the thoughts and words of a past exemplar in political party organization: “Nevertheless, I do once again affirm, most emphatically that the party is supreme, and that the party is the political cornerstone in all conduct and direction in public life”
- The author could be reached through his telephone number: +2348066621203.
