Lagos — The centre can no longer hold in Enugu state politics, the Ebeano political family has crashed, how do you feel today as a core member of this family?

There has been a total misrepresentation of the situation on ground in the press. Every process or system has a way of purifying itself and every process is dynamic.

There is no way you will expect that the Ebeano we had eight years ago, would continue to remain in the same format, in the name and in the same mode of operation. What has happened was that the Ebeano we had eight years ago yielded way to a new member of the family.

Let's take it back to an Africa family unit. In a family unit, when a father begets a son, the son moves away from the father's home and sets up his own home, this continues and that was how the earth was filled with over six billion people today.

That was exactly what has happened in Enugu state today, the family is expanding. As a tree enlarges so the branches increase.

For instance, I have answered Ayogu Ezeh, my children are bearing different surname, so things are changing.

What I think that happened, was that some persons refused to recognize this natural course of change in the state and try to block it by all means. You can not stand the way of nature and that was what some people are doing.

But no amount of force generated by human beings can halt the process of evolution and that was what happened in Enugu state.

Some persons see the whole thing as a personality clash, is that what you mean?

Well, in the process of evolution personalities must clash,. There is always dissension. Some people tried to stop the process of evolution and such persons have since learnt that you can not stop natural process.

Things are beginning to take their natural course and that is why you don't hear of any quarrel again in the state because what happened in the past was unnecessary struggle for turf and not fight for a space.

There were blackmails, character assassination and I believe that if one has had the opportunity to serve as a governor you should move away.

I was a commissioner for information before in the state and i moved on and I cannot go and start struggling with the commissioner for information in the state on how to go about his job.

Some times, when I arrive the state and he is meeting with the press I will refuse to go in there, because I don't want to struggle with any body , I f I had a point to make then as a commissioner and I couldn't do that with the time I had, too bad.

I went to the former governor before all this things started and advised him to move that he has been elected senator of the federal republic and he thanked me for that useful advice but some people for what they would gain from the situation advised him otherwise.

What is the place of the former governor, Senator Chimaraoke Nnamani in Enugu politics today?

The position of the former governor is that he is a senator of the federal Republic of Nigeria and he is alive to his senatorial responsibility and he has moved away from the Enugu turf and that he has moved to a new level of responsibility. I think he is dissipating his energy in that direction.

There are still pockets of faction in PDP, in Enugu and other south East states, would you say that the Senator Jim Nwaobodo reconciliation committee for the zone has failed?

No, the committee did not fail. The committee's submission on Enugu was that there was no faction in PDP in the state. There was a party executive led by Vita Abba and that executive has since been inaugurated and recognized by the national executive of the party.

In some states, for instance Imo and Anambra, where there are problems, that was why today you have another working on Anambra case. These are the areas where we have problems, because there is no problem in Enugu PDP.

If you insist there is no problem in Enugu PDP, how come some members took a paid advertorial against the governor few days before the Appeal court verdict?

Even people within the party hold opinion against themselves. The fact that some people disagreed with the governor does not mean that they have constituted a faction.

People who are disenchanted or not in agreement with the governor's modus operandi, that does not make them a faction. Every body cannot be happy all the time. We have our individual differences, and there are ways we would want things to be done and if the man in power is not doing exactly the way you would want it, you are likely to be uncomfortable.

So I think that was what has played out in some parts of the country and not only in Enugu state.

The National Executive Committee (NEC) of your party PDP has decided to amend its rules to specifically throw open the position of BOT chairmanship, and some persons alleged that the new posture was targeted at the former president Obasanjo, would you subscribe to this insinuations?

I believe it is wrong to say that the proposed change would lead to the removal of the BOT chairman , Obasanjo. I was out of the country when the party took the decision, but from what I read in the newspapers, the party wants to democratize that office, to make the office available for others.

The constitution of the party as amended in 2006 had circumscribed that office and put a ceiling, meaning that some people are not qualified to contest for the position but the party is saying that this is undemocratic.

We are not saying that Mr. A or B can not continue to be chairman of the party BOT, but in the process of A or B continuing to be chairman, it should be in such a manner that every body would have opportunity of becoming the chairman.

We should not just preclude some people ab initio from contesting for the position.

That is not democracy because democracy allows equal opportunity to all.

The party's pronouncement was clear, it was the interpretation of some people in the newspapers that it was targeted at A or B, but as a party member I had gone through that and I agree that it was targeted at democratizing the office of the BOT chairman and restoring its role as merely advisory body to the party.

At the point that changes were made it was clear that the whole thing was to make Obasanjo the only eligible person to occupy such position, and by removing that clause, it means a process of his ouster.

Unfortunately this is still within the realm of speculation, because that clause as it stands says former Head of state, and Obasanjo was not the only Head of state.

Gen. Gowon does not have a party and no body knows if he belongs to PDP. We don't know where Shonekon belongs. In any case we don't deal with speculations, but on practicalities.

What did the law say, the law says Mr A, B, C cannot aspire for such position, and that only D, E, F can, but the party in its wisdom today is saying no lets democratize this seat and let A, B, C, D, F to Z aspire for the seat.

So I insist that the decision was not targeted at Obasanjo, and I say because immediately after the party took the decision I read in papers where former senate president Ken Nnamani who is the leader of G 21 state clearly that they were not targeting individual or being against any particular person, but that they were crusading for openness, for democracy and due process.

What do say today about the way the new leadership of the party is going?

Well, the leadership of the party is still young and I believe that it would be too hasty for anybody to write them off at this stage. We want to assume that they are taking their time. I know that a lot have happened in that party before now and to clean up what has happened in the past in the party is not an easy thing to do.

The other day they were grappling with the problem of a duplicated secretariat , the office of the secretary of the party is different and then there was another that answers to chairman,

The constitution is very clear as to who should handle the secretariat matters of the party . So these are some of the basic issues that I think that are occupying the minds of the members of the party executive now,

We should give the new executive some time to be able to put things together before we would be able to make pronouncements on them.

In a few days from now the National Assembly panel on the review of the 1999 constitution will take off, given what happened to previous attempt, what's your advice to the committee?

My advice first is that the panel should not chew more than it can bite. Constitution amendment is not the same as writing a fresh constitution and there is no amendment that would make that constitution perfect. There is nothing by man that can not be improved upon no matter how good it is.

But I believe that constitution is governed by attitude, orientation, patriotism and agreement of a particular people to abide by its provisions.

I believe that these few areas that impede dispensation of justice. Justice as to the, balancing the federation, sharing the assets of the federation and the process of relationship between the three arms of government.

We should concentrate on few areas that would make the constitution flow more freely.

Last time they generated more than117 items for amendment. How you can treat 117 items at one time, they could as well be writing a new constitution. Our mind should be focused on the fact that we should bite all that we can chew, considering that we have very limited time.