More details have emerged from the National Executive Council meeting of the All Progressives Congress, where President Muhammadu Buhari proposed sweeping changes that led to the installation of the Caretaker/Extraordinary National Convention Committee.
The then Acting National Chairman of the party, Victor Giadom, through whose instrumentality President Buhari convened the meeting, was reportedly walked out before it ended in the Presidential Villa.
Tunde Rahman, the Media Aide to the National Chairman of the APC, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, revealed this in an article on Saturday.
The meeting, held on June 25, 2020, was at the instance of President Buhari, who before it had endorsed Giadom as the Acting National Chairman of the party.
Before the endorsement of Giadom, there were several claimants to the seat of the national chairman of the party.
While the bulk of the members of the National Working Committee of the party backed former Governor of Oyo State, Abiola Ajimobi, as replacement for the then suspended National Chairman, Adams Oshiomhole, there were those who backed Giadom.
In pronouncing him as the appropriate replacement for Oshiomhole, President Buhari said he had studied the situation to come to a fair and just conclusion.
The Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Public Affairs, Mallam Garba Shehu, said the President’s stance came after receiving “very convincing advice on the position of the law as far as the situation in the party is concerned and has determined that the law is on the side of Victor Giadom as Acting National Chairman.”
Shehu added: “We urge the media to stop promoting manufactured controversies and to not give any further room for mischievous interpretations of the law on this matter. In addition to the President, the Giadom meeting will, hopefully, be attended by our Governors and the leaders of the National Assembly.”
This development was read by some to mean the hold of Tinubu on APC had ended since he he had expressed his support for Oshiomhole and a victory for Giadom.
Rahman, however, said if Giadom thought he had secured victory to remain as National Chairman of the party, he was mistaken, as he was not only replaced by Governor Mai Male Buni of Yobe State as the head of the Caretaker/Extraordinary National Convention Committee, he was walked out before the meeting at the Presidential Villa ended.
The former Editor of Thisday on Sunday newspaper wrote: “Victor Giadom would never have laid claim to the APC chairmanship if not that certain figures were instigating his actions from their lairs in the shadows. He was not really an independent leadership figure. He was but the improvised explosive device of those who paid him to do their destructive work so that they may seem to keep their hands clean. Their motives were still soiled and sordid.
“The turmoil this minority caused indeed was hurting the party. President Muhammadu Buhari waited patiently, hoping matters would be resolved. However, when it became clear that the usurpers would not stop, he wisely determined to put an end to their penchant for confusion.
“The action taken at the recent National Executive Council meeting of the APC placed the party on an even keel. Giadom gloatingly waltzed into the meeting thinking himself chairman of the party. He was escorted out before the meeting ended. The court cases were to end. The party was to stand united behind the Edo primary winner, Osagie Ise-Iyamu. A caretaker committee comprised of leading and highly respected party members was formed to guide the party through elections in Edo and Ondo States and to schedule a national convention in six months.
“The minority usurpers were denied the core of what they had been plotting to achieve. Party leadership was moved as far from their hands as ever. They reacted predictably by vainly depicting this as a setback for the National Leader of the party, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. But Asiwaju’s statement on the matter set the record straight. If this were a defeat, it is one of those defeats so advantageous as to be indistinguishable from victory. In their dissections of events, some writers have, however, attached themselves to the empty conjecture and propaganda of the anti-party usurpers.”