Party Chieftain, Dr. OSWALD OLATUNBOSUN
Over the last few years the Labour Party has been enmeshed in crisis of immense proportion both at the national level and in some of the states like Lagos.
And all the attempts made so far has failed. Why is this so?
One of the party chieftains of Labour Party in Lagos spoke to City People a few days ago and he revealed all that has been going on in the party.
Dr. Oswald Olatunbosun is the former State Deputy Chairman of the Labour Party in Lagos State. He has been a member for over 3 years. He is from Ebiegberi in the Epe Local Government Area of Lagos State.
“Regarding the situation in the Labour Party, those of us committed to the party’s Constitution believe there is no faction within the party. Factions can only arise when individuals do not adhere to Labour Party’s Constitution. Some people may claim to belong to factions, but if you truly want to be a member of the Labour Party, you must follow the Constitution, and you will find that there is no division”.
“Historically, the Labour Party has never reached the current level of prominence in Nigeria’s political landscape. The best we have seen was perhaps during Governor Mimiko’s tenure. And when Senator Oshomole was part of the party, along with a few members in the National Assembly. However, today we have about 8 Senators and approximately 40 members in the House of Representatives, along with one governor”.
“After the elections, we should have consolidated our gains, but instead, we began to divide. It was puzzling to witness this fragmentation.
The issues within the Labour Party originated in Lagos. The chairman during the 2022 Labour Party elections struggled to manage the influx of new members and eventually brought in someone who was not a member of the Labour Party as the Chairman of Lagos State. This decision marked the beginning of our problems.
At that time, the National Executive Council of the party was intact with no factions. However, the introduction of that new chairman led to division, with some members feeling they could not work with him, causing them to split off and do their own thing. Although there were factions operating in Lagos, we still had one national executive body. Then, at some point, individuals began to declare themselves as part of a “transitional” group—something not acknowledged in the constitution—and started forming parallel structures nationwide.
After the elections, we hoped that with Mr. Peter Obi’s influence, things would improve. I have never encountered such dedicated politicians as those in the Labour Party. They worked without expecting anything in return because people genuinely yearn for a new Nigeria. Our party’s constitution shows that the Labour Party is the only party positioned to offer real support to Nigerians. When new members joined, the masses were less concerned about specific individuals; they were simply eager to vote for anyone representing the Labour Party.
Many of the current members in the National Assembly are not long-standing members of the Labour Party; they are opportunists who seized the moment. There was an Okada rider in Kaduna, who, against all odds, won a seat in the House of Representatives. This indicated that Nigerians are tired and seeking change. When they saw candidates running under the Labour Party, they rallied behind them wholeheartedly”.
“Interestingly, many of the seats won by the Labour Party in the Lagos State House of Assembly were taken from us. While we initially secured about 14 seats, we ultimately lost them during the tribunals. Several candidates failed to follow proper procedures and the electoral act, leading to their disqualification. Only one candidate remains standing, and even within the party, there was infighting against this individual”.
“In-house conflicts have caused us to lose numerous seats. It feels as if members within the party actively worked against each other, leading to our defeats. This issue seems to be less about external problems and more about internal strife. It’s as if anyone who can’t have it doesn’t want anyone else to have it either”.
“Currently, we experienced a situation with the Apampa faction. The circumstances surrounding the emergence of the Apampa faction were quite amusing; some claimed to have suspended the National Chairman from his ward. However, if you examine the Labour Party’s constitution, no organ of the party has the authority to suspend the National Chairman. Many of these individuals are not familiar with the rules”.
“Many people are accustomed to the dynamics of political events in parties like the APC, PDP, or during the eras of other parties such as the SDP and NRC. They tend to believe that the constitutions of all political parties are similar. In fact, one individual wrote the constitutions for parties like the AD, PDP, and APC, which is why they are almost identical. As a result, many political players assume that party constitutions are essentially the same.
In the Labour Party, however, some individuals believe that the highest elected officer automatically becomes the leader of the party. This belief exists in some political parties, where whether a candidate wins or loses, they are viewed as the leader. But in the Labour Party, that notion does not hold. Instead, party supremacy prevails, and the party’s constitution is paramount. Any action that does not align with the party’s constitution is deemed insignificant.
Recently, “Baba” Apapa was unexpectedly appointed as the acting leader while we were attending the tribunal. This situation reflects a failure to manage success. If a party is involved in a tribunal, must it then fracture internally? Some individuals have attempted to withdraw from the case, calling themselves a faction. Many are suggesting that external forces are influencing the party. If external entities are indeed involved, doesn’t that mean we lack the ability to think for ourselves? For the first time, we are trying to establish our identity, yet instead of uniting, we are fighting. Ultimately, these internal disputes did not prove productive.
After a series of unsuccessful attempts to resolve the issues, they decided to return to the mainstream. However, because their actions were not in accordance with the party’s constitution, those activities could never be sustainable in the long run.
Baba Apapa eventually stated that they would return to unity and start working together again. However, they had already been suspended from the party, making it impossible for him to reclaim his former position. It’s important to note that he was not alone in this situation; several others were also suspended from the party.
On Governor Otti, I believe he is a gentleman—cool-headed and hard-working. In my view, he is one of the best governors we’ve had in Nigeria so far. However, he may not have good political advisors or people well-versed in political affairs, which could lead to him being misled. He seems to think that, because he comes from the APC, he is now the leader of the party and should be able to call everyone to order. However, in the constitution of the Labour Party, there is no provision for a stakeholders meeting. You can only gather people informally, which merely serves to make them feel important, but it doesn’t establish a formal stakeholders meeting.
I believe many people in the Labour Party are not well-informed. If they were, we wouldn’t be facing the problems we have now. This is the time we should be working together as a unified force. Someone mentioned that the Labour Party has grown too large for the current National Executive Council to manage, suggesting that they are used to managing smaller political parties. Now that the party is bigger, they feel that this council cannot handle it.
I wonder what is meant by the claim that some people are too small to manage something. If these members have been in their positions for a long time and played a significant role in the party’s successes, shouldn’t those who consider themselves “big” instead offer support to help amplify their efforts? Perhaps some new people could also be incorporated into the party’s affairs to leverage their experience”.
However, rather than support, they have decided to establish a parallel structure, which is causing the current problems in the Labour Party. They recently convened a meeting to set up a caretaker committee at the national level—based on what authority? They claim that the recent national executive committee’s actions at the Nnewi convention were illegal. I questioned this assertion and learned that the objection was based on a court injunction from 2018, which stated that all parties must be included in conventions. I reminded them that the convention took place in 2019, and they should be aware that notice was given to the NLC, TUC, and everyone else involved”.
“Unfortunately, during that time, the Labour Unions were attending an international conference outside the country. Thus, TUC and NLC did not participate. Yet, they blame the party for the lack of representation at the convention. This convention was scheduled, and they were aware of it, but they chose to attend the international conference instead. That’s how the current Chairman was elected.
They claim the Chairman’s tenure expires in 2024, but they have forgotten that there was a NEC meeting in Asaba. In that meeting, even our former presidential candidate attended, along with many members of the National Assembly. In fact, we could consider that meeting as a special convention.
At that time, they extended the tenure of Barrister Julius Abure and the executive committee by one year, which was set to expire in June 2024. Before that year ended, the National Executive Committee notified INEC, as required by the electoral act, that they wanted to hold a convention. The venue was originally set for Abia State but was later moved to Nnewi. I found myself wondering why they made that change. Perhaps it was because our former presidential candidate had an interest in the location and wanted it to be used”.
“I accepted the venue change. While they were making all the arrangements, I was puzzled as to why certain prominent figures in the party believed that the current Chairman should not be in office. It was unclear whether they were unaware of the national executives’ plans or if they were simply indifferent to the fact that the national convention would elect the leadership of the party. At the time, there was no faction within the party”.
When the date for the Convention was announced, no one challenged the decision, except for one individual who went to court claiming the Convention should not take place. Interestingly, this person was not a current member of the Labour Party and did not hold any position within it. So, I questioned, what was his interest in the Labour Party? He went to court, but ultimately, the court reviewed his claims and determined that he had no grounds for challenging the convention. The court pointed out that he was not a stakeholder in this matter, having no membership or position in the party. Therefore, he had no basis for declaring that the convention could not proceed, and his case was dismissed.
After the Convention, none of these prominent figures challenged the outcome in court. According to the Electoral Act, if someone is dissatisfied with the process, they must file a challenge within 14 days of the event, with a maximum of 21 days. However, they failed to do so. Then, in September, several months after the convention in February, something unexpected occurred involving Umayyad. They went to court, claiming that Barrister Abure was not the valid chairman and asserted that I should not recognize him as such. Barrister Abure then sought a court interpretation.
The High Court ruled that he had indeed fulfilled all requirements in accordance with the party’s constitution during the convention. Some people claimed that the convention was not inclusive and that they had not adequately involved others. However, many did not read the party’s constitution thoroughly. Article 14 of the constitution states that the composition of delegates at the national convention can be modified. It clarifies that all stakeholders, including governors, Deputy Governors, House of Representatives members, senators, and former chairpersons, are supposed to be represented.
