By Prince C. Kamara
It appears that the reforms which the breakaway or call them reformist group within the All People’s Congress (APC) party, the National Reformation Movement (NRM) intended to introduce into the reviewed constitution of the party has now backfired and the NRM has literally shot its own leg!
When it all started, everyone following the debates, press conferences, accusations and counter-accusations between and among the bickering parties in the APC were amused; thinking that at long last, a drastic change would happen in the APC which could likely see the ‘old APC guards’ shoved aside to give way to a younger breed of APC politicians. But sadly, it appears this is now a botched dream.
Weeks before the aborted APC mini convention, it appeared that the NRM was well placed to have their voices heard when the day arrived. Everything seemed to be in place for the adoption of the APC revised constitution to be discussed; amendments made and a final draft accepted. There was no signal from the NRM or the APC (old guards) that anything could possibly overturn the proposed adoption of the party’s revised constitution.
It therefore came as a shock to the APC (old guards) and the general public when the NRM quietly and without warning succeeded at having the High Court slam an injunction stopping the organizers from holding the mini convention in Port Loko over the weekend.
Their reasons for taking this bold and unprecedented step was because they felt threatened that their proposed reforms in the revised APC constitution were going to be rejected at the mini convention by the status quo.
But the shocker came when no less a person that the Chairman and Leader of the APC, former President Ernest Bai Koroma announced to the general membership sitting inside the Port Loko Bai Bureh Hall that, because there is an court injunction stopping the party from holding its mini convention, the party will resort to using its substantive 1995 constitution to carry out its activities until such a time when they get around to addressing the issues arising in the injunction.
So who wins, and who loses?