Kwara PDP To Musa Audu: Mind Your Language, Inability To Secure Party Nomination Isn’t ‘Injustice’
Kwara State PDP has dismissed claims of unfairness by a former House of Representatives aspirant, Dr. Audu Musa Idowu, submitting that failing to secure party nomination ahead of an election does not in any way constitute an injustice.
In a statement issued in Ilorin to react to Dr. Idowu’s recent resignation from the party which was made available to Team@orientactualmags.com by the state Publicity Secretary, Mr Olusola Olusegun Adewara, Kwara State PDP described the medical doctor’s allegations of lack of ‘justice, equity, and fairness’ as a misrepresentation of facts and an attempt to blackmail the party leadership.
Dr. Idowu, a former Ekiti/Isin/Irepodun/Oke-Ero PDP reps aspirant had cited these concerns in his resignation letter.
While noting that it respects Dr. Idowu’s decision to exit the party and wishing him well in his future political pursuits, Kwara State PDP however emphasized the need to provide proper context to the public regarding its internal processes.
The statement said the party’s focus ahead of the 2027 general election has shifted away from individual ambitions or prominent names to the collective interest of the public while describing itself as a democratic organization where multiple qualified members have the right to contest for elective positions, the defeat of any single aspirant does not therefore mean that the system is unjust.
Addressing Dr. Idowu’s specific claims regarding the ‘Ekiti bloc’, the PDP pointed to its historical record as evidence of its commitment to equity in the Federal constituency and Kwara South. The party noted that former Senator Simeon Ajibola, who hails from the Ekiti axis, represented Kwara South in the Senate under the PDP from 2004 to 2015, a level of representation that has not been matched by any other political platform since 1999.
The party further stated that its track record includes consistently offering opportunities to the Ekiti bloc across consecutive election cycles to produce consensus candidates and representatives, reinforcing its position that the internal democratic outcomes are based on collective party strategy rather than marginalisation.
‘It is also on record that across two consecutive election cycles, the PDP considered the Ekiti bloc and gave it the opportunity to produce its House of Representatives candidate through Hon. Dare Bankole, who sought to occupy the parliament seat on the party’s platform in both 2019 and 2023. This record clearly demonstrates that the PDP had consistently provided the Ekiti people with significant opportunities for political representation and leadership, making the claim of injustice against the axis preposterous and difficult to sustain.
As a party that is determined to wrestle power from the ruling party, the PDP cannot approach the 2027 contest in exactly the same way as previous political arrangements or act as though the interests of the other component parts of the constituency do not matter. Beyond mere rotational arrangement, we believe that a serious political party must among other factors, consider voter distribution, the acceptability of aspirants across the constituency, grassroots structures, capacity, competence and, importantly, the candidate’s ability to win the election.
It is also important to recall that during Dr. Audu’s engagement with the party, he expressed his willingness to support whoever the party eventually considered capable of winning the election. Our party therefore finds the present development unfortunate as his current public posture appears inconsistent with the spirit of sportsmanship and commitment to the collective interest that he had earlier expressed.
In as much as every politician has the constitutional and political right to make his or her choice, including leaving a party, we will not accept any attempt to portray a legitimate political decision as an act of injustice merely because an individual aspiration did not materialize.
The PDP is equally conscious that political disagreements are normal in a democratic environment. Aspirants may disagree with the outcome of a process, seek another platform or even choose to leave a political party. Such decisions should, however, be handled with responsibility and without unnecessary blackmail against the institution that provided the platform for their political participation’ the statement added.
.
The party urged Dr. Audu to reconsider the language of grievance and avoid statements that can unnecessarily undermine the party or misrepresent the considerations behind its decisions –Team@
