By Rayyanu Bala

Citizens of Nasarawa State woke up yesterday morning to a petition addressed to National Chairman of APC, circulating on social media claiming that Senator Wadada failed to notify the Senate about his resignation from the Social Democratic Party (SDP). at the time he did in August last year until last week. The allegation suggests he did this to avoid being removed as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Accounts, therefore he is not qualified to run on the ticket of APC since he has not met the mandatory requirements of number of months an aspirant supposed to spent in party before contesting for an election as contained in an electoral act.
In reality, this petition is, to all intents and purposes, nothing more than political noise and this is the season for it.
In fact, if you opened social media yesterday and came across the petition, you might have thought something scandalous had been uncovered, that Wadada secretly defected from the SDP to the All Progressives Congress (APC) and cleverly avoided notifying the Senate in order to cling to his position. But once you scratch beneath the surface, the argument doesn’t hold up.
First, let’s address the constitutional angle, because that’s where many of these claims attempt to anchor themselves. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is clear about the broad powers and structure of the legislature. It says absolutely nothing about which party must chair which committee. There is no clause, subsection, or hidden provision that reserves the Public Accounts Committee for opposition lawmakers.
What actually governs these appointments are the Senate’s internal rules, otherwise known as the Standing Orders. And, more importantly, the political judgment of the Senate leadership, particularly the Senate President. Committee leadership in Nigeria is not a constitutional entitlement; it is a political arrangement. That is the reality.
Now, some people often point to other democracies where oversight committees like the Public Accounts Committee are chaired by opposition members. That is true. However, it is a convention, not a law. It is about optics and balance, not legal obligation. Even in those systems, conventions can shift when political dynamics change.
So, the real issue here is not legality, it is preference. Some people believe the committee should be chaired by a member of the opposition, and that is a fair opinion. But presenting that preference as a constitutional violation is simply misleading.
Then there is the issue of the defection itself. The narrative being pushed is that Wadada acted in secrecy. However, that does not align with reality. His move from the SDP to the APC was not hidden, it was widely reported, discussed, and acknowledged. He submitted his resignation at the ward level, which is the appropriate organizational structure for party membership. That requirement was fulfilled.
The claim that he needed to “notify the Senate” in some special procedural way to legitimize his defection is also questionable. Yes, defections are often announced on the Senate floor, but the consequences some are trying to attach to this situation do not automatically follow. Once again, we are dealing with discretion, not rigid rules.
And that is the thread tying everything together: discretion. The Senate President has the authority to assign and retain committee leadership. If Wadada remained Chairman after his defection, it is because the leadership permitted it. Simple.
So, what are we really looking at? Not a constitutional breach. Not a procedural scandal. Just a political disagreement being amplified into something it is not.
In a political climate especially in Nasarawa State, these kinds of narratives are not unusual. Petitions, allegations, and counter-allegations are part of the terrain. But not every petition carries weight, and not every accusation deserves attention.
This petition does not deserve any attention, as it is simply another attempt to score political points and is, at best, dead on arrival.