POLITICS Fraudulent Conversion: The Case Against Dr Abass Bundu And Others Posted by Ndor-mui Hindowa on Nov 12, 2009, 09:24

Dr Abass Bundu with Kanja Sesay.....Both Aiming For The SLPP High Seat

Dr. Abass Bundu’s letter of September 7, 2009 to the Secretary General of the SLPP, published in several newspapers recently has brought into the open a quarrel in the Party that has been brewing for a long time. The quarrel is over Chapter 4 (4.5) of a new party constitution adopted at the last convention in Kenema.  Chapter 4 (4.5) states that “a member of the National Executive shall not be eligible to be elected Presidential or Vice Presidential nominee whilst holding the executive office nor such election immediately following his/her vacation from that office”. There are those in the SLPP who believe that this law is un-progressive, counter-productive, discriminatory, and not in the interest of the party.  Dr. Abass Bundu has come out as a public face for another group of people who hold that the Constitution as passed in Kenema stands; and be submitted to the Political Parties Registration Commission (PPRC).

I have spent considerable time weighing the various positions. I write this article out of conviction in support of those who are opposed to Chapter 4 (4.5) of the new SLPP constitution; and want it repealed. I begin with the submission that it is a bad law to disqualify members of the party’s executive from seeking to become flag bearers. This submission will be elaborated in another article; but suffice it to point out now that Dr. Abass Bundu once shared this position.

In fact, it was Dr. Abass Bundu who chaired the Northern Region Constitution Review Committee. It was this same Dr Abass Bundu who presented the Northern position in Kenema. Dr. Abass Bundu is amply explicit on his previous role in opposing Chapter 4(4.5) in his letter of September 7, 2009. Dr. Bundu has the absolute right to convert to a new position now; but he would have been more helpful to bring scores of us along with an articulation of the new merits re-discovered in what he had previously perceived and presented as a bad law in Kenema. Disregarding the bad imports of this law and claiming conversion to upholding it on the basis of principles is a fraudulent conversion.

It is fraudulent on the part of Dr. Abass Bundu to also suggest that the current executive hold ambitions to change the SLPP Constitution. The executive of the SLPP knows it does not have such powers. The current 1995 Constitution of the party stipulates that an “amendment to the constitution or any part thereof may be made by two-thirds of the members present and voting at the Annual Party Conference...”. It is precisely these provisions for amending the constitution that the current executive is trying to protect.

Chapter 4 (4.5) is an amendment to the SLPP Constitution. The fact is that Chapter 4 (4.5) which bars members of the executive from seeking to become flag-bearer was not put to a vote at the Kenema Convention. The endorsement and ratification of this clause was determined by the Legal Committee who prejudged it as a minority position without allowing the delegates to vote on it as required by the current Party Constitution. This is a contravention of the stipulations for amendments in the current SLPP Party Constitution. Chapter 4 (4.5) therefore is a fraudulent insertion. It is the Legal Committee that wants to make an amendment to the Constitution outside stipulated processes. The current executive should be commended for insisting on protecting the integrity of the SLPP Constitution.

Dr. Abass Bundu and others who want Chapter 4 (4.5) in the new Constitution have been dubious with the facts. The provision barring members from seeking to become flag-bearer was among four key changes to the Constitution objected to by certain sections of the Party before and during the Kenema Convention. The objections were put in writing and tendered to the erstwhile executive. At the Convention two of the four suggested changes were put to the vote. These were the clause that require a Presidential candidate and his running –mate to be elected together on the same ticket by the Conference; and that the election of the Presidential candidate be done not earlier than one year before the Presidential elections.

The issues of members of the executive seeking to become flag-bearer, and allowing Councillors to sit as delegates at a Party Conference were never put to the vote. Today the SLPP risks adopting a Constitution where some changes are the expressed will of delegates at a Party Conference; while others are fraudulent insertions.

The Constitution is therefore simply not valid. Let us assume that J. J. Saffa takes Dr. Abass Bundu’s instructions and submit the Constitution to the PPRC. People, who are opposed to Chapter 4 (4.5) including me, will raise objections within a month as provided for by the PPRC Act. Ultimately, recourse would have to be made to another delegates’ conference. This is the embarrassment that the current executive is saving the Party from.

The executive has not failed to send the Constitution to the PPRC on account of Chapter 4 (4.5) alone as Dr. Abass Bundu and others want the public to believe.  Another fraud has been discovered in the new Constitution. In the draft Constitution that was circulated after the Convention the Chairman’s functions included “to uphold and defend the Constitution; and “to represent the Party in high level dialogue with Government or Development Partners”. In the new Constitution that is about to go to the PPRC these functions have been duplicated for the Secretary General. This duplication was not in the draft Constitution circulated to members before and during the Convention. (na oo dat put am dae?) There are other important changes to the Constitution that never sought delegates consent. These included the categorization of Diaspora branches as regions or as branches, and the categories of membership. The truth is that the Constitution has been fingered with terribly. 

Anybody asking that this sort of document be sent to the PPRC is doing grave injustice to the SLPP and abrogating the will of the Party’s membership as represented in Kenema. These flaws have been the subject of discussions at several meetings of the Party’s hierarchy. Consensus was ultimately reached that the Constitution would require substantial amendments but only under the authority of a National Delegates Conference as provided for in the current Constitution.

Accusations that John Benjamin intends to stand as a flag bearer are non-starters. Arguments that people in the current executive knew about this law is equally a non-starter. This law is good or bad irrespective of whether John Benjamin, Dr. Kadi Sesay, or Dr. Bobson Sesay want to stand or not. This law can be made to stand or expunged on account of its value or devalue. Those supporting the new provision in the Constitution should actually support the executive to call another delegate conference. At such a conference the provision may then have the legitimate weight of the voted decision of the delegates if they are so convinced about its merits.  

Dr. Abass Bundu and others are right in upholding the supremacy of the National Delegates Conference in making or amending laws for the SLPP. Let me point that the present executive has not stated in any terms or manner intent to subvert this supremacy. It is the simple fact that the process of adopting the new constitution has not been completed. It has been discovered that the Constitution is carrying provisions which were objected to and were not voted for by delegates in Kenema. Recourse to the due process of a National Delegates Conference to redress this problem is a foregone conclusion.