PDP Crisis Deepens as Bode George Warns of Expulsion for Former Governor Sule Lamido
In what appears to be escalating internal tensions within Nigeria’s main opposition party, a senior member of the Peoples Democratic Party’s Board of Trustees has issued a stark warning that former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido risks expulsion for allegedly flouting party procedures and protocols.
The political storm erupted during a televised interview on Thursday when Chief Bode George, a respected elder statesman within the PDP, revealed that Lamido’s absence from a crucial National Executive Committee meeting and his subsequent actions had violated established party norms, potentially triggering disciplinary measures that could include expulsion from the party.
A Breach of Protocol or Political Maneuvering?
The controversy centers around what George described as Lamido’s deliberate decision to skip the recent NEC meeting—the party’s second-highest decision-making body after the national convention—only to appear at the party headquarters on the final day to submit nomination forms for upcoming party activities.
“Lamido knows the procedure. He’s one of the founding fathers of this party,” George emphasized during his appearance on Arise Television, monitored by DAILY POST. “He didn’t attend the last NEC meeting. In terms of hierarchy, NEC is the next level to the national convention, and its decisions must be respected.”
Political observers note that this public rebuke of a founding member signals deeper underlying tensions within the opposition party as it struggles to present a united front ahead of future elections. The public nature of the warning suggests that party leadership is taking a harder line on internal discipline, perhaps recognizing that internal cohesion remains critical to the PDP’s electoral prospects.
The Hierarchy of Party Discipline
George’s comments highlight the delicate balance between individual political ambition and collective party discipline in Nigerian politics. The PDP chieftain stressed that Lamido’s actions undermined the very foundation of party unity and established procedures.
“What the organizers of the convention are trying to do is ensure a seamless process,” George explained. “All zonal members attended the meeting except Lamido, yet he appeared at the last minute demanding a form. He must respect the rules.”
This incident raises important questions about how political parties maintain discipline among senior members who may feel their historical contributions grant them certain privileges. Can founding members operate outside established protocols? Or does party discipline apply equally to all members, regardless of their status or historical significance?
The Precedent of Party Discipline in Nigerian Politics
Nigerian political history is replete with examples of senior party members facing disciplinary action for perceived insubordination. The PDP itself has previously suspended or expelled prominent members for various infractions, though the application of these measures has sometimes appeared selective or politically motivated.
What makes this particular case noteworthy is the public nature of the warning and the stature of both individuals involved. Lamido, as a former governor and founding member, represents a significant faction within the party, while George’s position on the Board of Trustees gives his warnings considerable weight.
The timing of this controversy is particularly sensitive for the PDP, which has been working to rebuild its organizational structure and public image following recent electoral setbacks. Internal discipline has emerged as a critical factor in the party’s ability to present itself as a credible alternative to the ruling party.
The Implications for Party Unity
Political analysts suggest that how the PDP handles this situation could have far-reaching implications for party cohesion. A harsh punishment against a founding member might alienate certain factions within the party, while failure to enforce stated rules could embolden others to flout party procedures.
George’s warning reflects a growing sentiment among party leadership that internal discipline must be prioritized, even if it means confronting senior members. “He must respect the rules,” George reiterated, signaling that party protocols apply to all members equally, regardless of their status or historical contributions.
The situation also highlights the ongoing power struggles within opposition politics in Nigeria, where personal ambitions sometimes clash with collective party interests. As the PDP positions itself for future electoral contests, managing these internal tensions becomes increasingly crucial.
The Road Ahead for PDP and Internal Democracy
This incident raises broader questions about internal democracy within Nigerian political parties. While parties often preach democratic principles, the practical application of these principles frequently falls short, with senior members sometimes expecting special treatment based on their status or historical roles.
George’s stance suggests a possible shift toward more consistent application of party rules, though whether this represents an isolated incident or a new standard remains to be seen. The coming weeks will likely reveal how seriously the party leadership takes these protocol violations and whether Lamido will face formal disciplinary proceedings.
For now, the public warning serves as both a specific rebuke and a general message to other party members: established procedures must be followed, and violations will not be tolerated, regardless of one’s position within the party hierarchy.
As Nigerian opposition politics continues to evolve, incidents like this will test the PDP’s commitment to internal discipline and its ability to maintain unity amid competing interests and ambitions. The outcome of this particular confrontation may well set the tone for how the party manages internal dissent and discipline in the future.