The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has cautioned the Chief Justice Of Nigeria (CJN), Olukayode Ariwoola to be neutral and not to dabble in the internal politics of the party.
The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba, in a statement on Saturday, flayed the CJN over his comment on the politics of the party.
Ariwoola had allegedly made some comments on the G5 and Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State on Thursday at a dinner held in his honour by Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State in Port Harcourt.
The G5 is made up of five aggrieved governors of the PDP calling for the resignation of the party’s National Chairman, Iyorchia Ayu as a precondition to support the PDP presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar. The G5 wants Ayu to step down over what they described as northern dominance within the party.
Aside from Wike and Makinde, other members of the G5 are Governors Samuel Ortom (Benue), Okezie Ikpeazu (Abia), and Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi (Enugu).
READ ALSO: INEC Releases Guidelines, Bans Campaigns In Churches, Mosques
However, the PDP said, “By delving into the internal affairs of the PDP at a public event in Port Harcourt, Rivers State on Thursday, November 24, 2022 where he was reported to have made reference to the political activities of some PDP governors, which comment is viewed to be encouraging division in our Party, the PDP posits that the CJN’s action is unacceptable and inconsistent with his status as the head of the Judicial arm of government.
“Irrespective of the circumstance or situation, the CJN is expected to be circumspect at all times and avoid partisan actions and utterances that are likely to erode the institutional integrity of the Judiciary and bring it to disrepute especially as the nation prepares for the 2023 general elections.
“In a Federal Republic such as Nigeria, with a Constitutional Separation of Powers, the Judiciary is entrusted with the responsibility of interpretation of the laws and as such should be seen to be neutral at all times and endeavour to interpret and review the laws in the context of the case and controversy of the parties before it.”
