Last week’s shock ruling of the Appeal Court sitting in Port Harcourt that overturned the PDP’s governorship election victory in Bayelsa State almost exactly one year after it was declared has once again brought that beleaguered state to the forefront of national politics for all the wrong reasons. A close reading of the ruling seems to suggest that it is the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that was at fault.

The absence of vital forms and evidence of proper electoral processes having been confirmed it seems that the Tribunal, which had granted the governor earlier relief, erred seriously in that it assumed that an election took place even though there was no evidence of this. If the Appeal Court ruling is credible then the electoral officers who served in Bayelsa State last year should be indicted. It does not seem that this course of action is being contemplated however and the main focus appears to be on achieving the eventual run-off once more with the main actors being the same candidates who faced off in the contest last year.

In the PDP the question of renewing the ticket has become an acrimonious issue. In the conventional manner of that party those who are now controlling its affairs in the state believe that after a lot of internal squabbling the status quo ante will prevail. In such an event in spite of the disgrace that the loss of the appeal entails the compromised Governor will be restored to power.

This will neither be unexpected nor fatal to the party’s fortunes in the nation as a whole. But the process of democratic veracity will have failed an important test if at the end of the exercise the general opinion holds that the new election was as questionable as the one that was overturned. It is therefore INEC’s ability to restore faith in the process that will be under scrutiny in the forthcoming exercise rather than the question of whether the dismissed governor is the most appropriate candidate or not.

The internal divisions that have been exposed in the state chapter of the PDP by the outcome of the appeal are not surprising. For some weeks before the appeal was heard it was obvious that all was not well with the party in the state, especially since the change of baton that occurred before the zonal congresses and the national convention was clearly carried out in an irregular manner. Because strategies and tactics redolent with intrigue and the personalisation of affairs of state have become commonplace in the PDP no one was surprised at the explosion of bitterness that trailed the Appeal Court verdict on the part of some legislators from the state.

On the other hand the new state Chairman of the party Mr. Rufus Abbadi was not diplomatic at all in his response to the criticism of the governor that emanated from those legislators. His appearance on national television to virtually excoriate those who criticised the Governor’s performance so far was an incredible performance. His vehement allegations of virtual anti-party activity against some of the state’s most illustrious PDP members has created even more confusion as it now appears that in the run-up to the new election the mood is not a conciliatory one in the Bayelsa State chapter of the party.

This is the surprising thing. Whereas one would have thought that the party executive in the state would have chosen to appeal for unity and reconciliation the Chairman’s outburst indicates that the strategy for the time being is to be confrontation within the party rather than solidarity against the party’s adversaries who have won this round.

Events so far indicate that the main protagonists in this imbroglio, the dismissed Governor and his supporters, are not making any noticeable effort to prepare for a genuine contest of issues and discourse but are rather preparing to use the old tactics of intimidation and state largesse to restore the status quo. So far in fact the victor in the battle appears to be sidelined in the politics of the state in spite of his victory.

Ebitimi Amgbare’s role as the people’s champion in this battle was compromised to some extent because he was once a PDP stalwart himself having served as a Commissioner in the Alamieyeseigha government. In addition he had actually only taken up the Alliance Congress (AC) ticket a few weeks to last year’s contest in a strange and not very convincing show of political adversity. However no matter how dubious his entry into the race might have seemed his persistence and determination in challenging the outcome of the election has strengthened his relevance in the state’s political calculations.

One of the strangest pieces of information to come to our notice since the Appeal Court ruling is the allegation that when Amgbare sought to arrange meetings in Bayelsa State shortly after the ruling in a bid to commence his campaign preparations some security agents said that they could not guarantee his safety. If this is true it should be investigated at the highest level.

The duty of the Federal security agencies is to protect the interests of the people and the state equally at all times and in the new dispensation guaranteeing the rights and security of opposition figures is as important as any task assigned to them. In the case where a challenge to the status quo has been upheld by the courts of the land this responsibility becomes even more imperative. The security agencies assigned to Bayelsa State should regard this as an important test of their objectivity and efficiency.

Many observers fear that Bayelsa might descend into a spiral of violence and disenchantment as a result of this latest manifestation of the dysfunctional politics that has become so commonplace in the state. Their anxiety is based on the fundamental presumption that the PDP cannot afford to lose the state because it is the Vice President’s home.

Because of this it is widely believed that internal bitterness will not allow the party to establish its right to re-examine its choices and that the one year of power that Timipre Sylva has enjoyed has given him the opportunity to put his own structures in place. These structures are based on personal loyalty rather than on a collective and rational commitment to the objectives of a united party, or that is what it seems like if the events and utterances of the last week are to be taken seriously.

Judging from the state Chairman’s exposition on TV there is no room for discussion or compromise and the idea is not for the former governor to negotiate his return to power with a broad cross section of the party but rather for a narrow and arrogant band of loyalists to impose his return on the party hierarchy as a form of political blackmail.

This will be a sad turn of events and INEC’s task of ensuring that the new election is more open and equitable than the last abortive exercise will not be made any easier by this circumstance. This will be most unfortunate. It will be another opportunity lost for a corrective process to be implemented. Governor Timipre Sylva’s return will be a shambles if he regains his seat under an even greater cloud of suspicion over his selection by his party, and even more inadequate electoral operations, than when he first claimed victory. He might feel vindicated if this occurs but the state will continue to suffer the consequences of improper assumptions of the leadership of its government and lose it greatest opportunity so far to change the sad record of its past trials.

Responses By Text Only: 08056180039