The Chairman of the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC) in Yobe State, Umar Jajere, and the Secretary-General, Mustapha Gado, have rejected their purported impeachment, describing the exercise as invalid and lacking any legal foundation.
The two officials insisted that they remain the council’s recognised leaders and accused those behind the move of violating the provisions of the IPAC Code of Conduct (2019). Their position was made known in a statement issued on Saturday, in which they argued that the purported impeachment contravened several provisions of the council’s code and was therefore unacceptable.
The Background of the Dispute
The controversy began on Thursday when the council announced the removal of Jajere and Gado in a statement signed by its Acting Secretary, Habiba Umaru. The announcement followed an emergency meeting held at the council’s secretariat along Potiskum Road, Damaturu, the state capital.
According to the announcement, the decision was reached after a vote of no confidence in the two officers. They were accused of failing to consult member political parties on important decisions and of neglecting regular meetings of the council’s executive and general assembly. The council further alleged that the former leaders used its name to receive quarterly palliatives from the North-East Development Commission and other government and non-governmental organisations for personal benefit, without the knowledge or involvement of member parties.
Quorum and Procedural Objections
In rejecting the exercise, Jajere and Gado said the meeting failed to meet the requirement of having at least 50 per cent of the membership of either the State Executive Council or the State Assembly, as stipulated in Sections 8(ii) and 8(iv) of the code.
“The meeting did not satisfy the required quorum prescribed by the IPAC Code of Conduct. Any decision reached without meeting this fundamental requirement cannot be considered valid,” they said.
The duo also faulted the participation of some individuals at the meeting, alleging that they were not validly nominated in writing by their respective political party state chairmen, contrary to Sections 4.2(a) and 15 of the code. They further argued that the meeting was improperly convened, claiming that no written request signed by two-thirds of the members was submitted and that the chairman was not given the mandatory seven-day notice required under Section 8(vii).
“The code is clear on the procedures for convening meetings and taking decisions. You cannot disregard these provisions and expect the outcome to be recognised as legitimate,” the officials stated.
Disciplinary Process Faulted
On the disciplinary process, Jajere and Gado maintained that no complaint was submitted to the Disciplinary Committee or the Political Parties Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee before the purported impeachment. They added that no investigation was conducted to establish any wrongdoing against them before the decision was announced.
“There was no formal complaint against us, no investigation and no opportunity for us to respond to any allegation. The prescribed disciplinary procedures were not followed,” they said.
The officials insisted that they remain the legitimate leadership of IPAC in Yobe State and warned individuals against parading themselves as officials based on the purported impeachment.
“Nobody can assume the leadership of IPAC in Yobe State through an illegal process. We remain the recognised chairman and secretary of the council until the appropriate procedures are followed,” they declared.
Threat of Sanctions and Calls for Recognition
Jajere and Gado also threatened disciplinary measures, including suspension, against members who participated in the exercise, accusing them of violating the council’s Code of Conduct.
They urged the Yobe State Government, the State Independent Electoral Commission, the Independent National Electoral Commission and other political stakeholders to recognise only them as the legitimate leaders of the state’s council. The officials further disclosed that the national secretariat of IPAC had been notified of the development in accordance with Section 4.3 of the code.
The standoff leaves the council’s leadership in dispute, with both sides laying claim to legitimacy as political parties in the state continue their activities under the umbrella of the advisory body.
