When the framers of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, as amended, opted for a  multi-party system, the intention was to expand the minefield of political ideologies, alternative views and indeed foster healthy competition among Nigerian political platforms, upon which the country can depend for the  electable representatives. To achieve that feat, the same constitution provided political parties with the necessary powers and quasi-sovereignty to conduct their internal affairs with little or no interference by the National Electoral  Commission (INEC), the lawful body empowered to superintend election and elections matters in the land, and oversee activities of the parties.
So powerful, political parties even succeeded in preventing the judiciary from interfering in their internal crises, no matter the magnitude of threat such unlimited freedom posed to the fragile democracy, the Nigerian state was experimenting.
Undoubtedly, that seeming limitless power to decide on candidates for general elections brewed dangerous signals of undemocratic culture, as the choice of candidates at various times, depended on everything except merit and intra party democracy.

Their internal affairs with little or no interference by the National Electoral  Commission (INEC), the lawful body empowered to superintend election and elections matters in the land, and oversee activities of the parties.
So powerful, political parties even succeeded in preventing the judiciary from interfering in their internal crises, no matter the magnitude of threat such unlimited freedom posed to the fragile democracy, the Nigerian state was experimenting.
Undoubtedly, that seeming limitless power to decide on candidates for general elections brewed dangerous signals of undemocratic culture, as the choice of candidates at various times, depended on everything except merit and intra party democracy.
It took what is now commonly referred to as the Amaechi re-instatement ruling of October 25, 2007 by the Supreme Court of Nigeria for parties to realise that the liberty to run their internal affairs were also limited by the religious adherence to intra-party democracy and indeed obedience to rules contained in their various party constitutions. Another is the fact that anytime such constitutions were observed in the breach, or when their provisions conflict with those of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the latter reigns supreme.
The Tide believes that the epochal Supreme Court judgement which restored Rt. Hon. Chibuikre Rotimi Amaechi’s mandate about five months after another had been sworn-in went beyond a personal victory. That ruling indeed, redefined Nigeria’s judicial courage and gallantry, defended fairness, equity and the rule of law, promoted intra-party democracy and most importantly, institutionalised enduring structures for punishment and reward in electoral matters.
To appreciate the value, import and indeed propriety of October 25, the history of how then Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Amaechi contested and won the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship primaries as required by law; how he was denied the mandate to contest the April 14, 2007 election on account of the K-leg theory; how, despite his subsisting protest through the lower court to Appeal Court and to the Supreme Court, he was suspended from the party for seeking justice outside the party; how he was substituted with another candidate, even along the run of litigation, without cogent and verifiable reasons and finally, how Barr . Celestine Omehia was eventually declared winner of the general elections even if he did not contest the party’s primaries as prescribed by law, must be put in context and perspective.
More importantly, the Supreme Court ruling ended the familiar culture of impunity often demonstrated by dogmatic political party leaders and god –fathers who often imposed candidates, ‘win’ elections by hook or crook, get such rogue candidates endorsed by INEC and sworn-in, in belief that once such sponsored stooge takes oath of office, the resources of the state would be employed to defend the wrong, and make it look right at all cost.
In such instances, the best the judiciary was often left to do after identifying obvious flaws was to order fresh elections, which was the worst case scenario manipulators of Governor Amaechi’s mandate anticipated.
But in what has become a landmark judgement designed, among other things, to erect stronger reward structures in electoral matters, the Supreme Court ruled that by Amaechi’s unchallenged victory at the party’s primaries, and his eventual illegal substitution without cogent and verifiable reasons by INEC as required by law, whosoever contested the election on the PDP platform was an impostor or did so for and on behalf of Governor Amaechi. It then gave the order that he be sworn-in as elected governor of Rivers State.
The Tide would have considered this elaborate recall totally unnecessary if not for questions recently raised against the propriety of reliving events of October 25, 2007 as an important date in the state’s democratic calendar.
In fact, some politicians have argued that such annual observance had been over taken by events, for the singular reason that Governor Amaechi had since sought, earned and won re-election in 2011, which  in their view, diminishes the 2007 redemption of his first mandate.
The Tide  disagrees.  Without the Supreme Court’s verdict, and considering the antecedent  of political parties in punishing members who seek justice beyond the confines of existing intra-party disciplinary structures, Governor Amaechi’s second-term bid would have been more tortuous than the first. Infact, analysts insist without October 25, 2007 serving as check, Amaechi’s  re-election as the PDP candidate would have been a mirage.
More importantly, going by the content of congratulatory messages sent to Governor Amaechi in the press by appreciative stakeholders of the Rivers project, what was celebrated was the conviction that without the October 25, 2007 Supreme Court ruling, the impressive developmental strides recorded by the Rivers  government would have been unthinkable.
Such stakeholders variously pointed to landmark achievements in the areas of education, with the erection of more than 150 model primary schools, and more than10 state of the art secondary schools and still counting; health centres with countless modern health centres and world class referral centres, infrasturctural development, with roads, inter-changes fly-overs and bridges, and huge investment in agriculture, among many others. Without Amaechi, these many others and the recent recruitment and posting of more than 13,000 teachers would have been a pipe dream.
These are why The Tide joins other well-meaning Nigerians, especially lovers of enduring intra-party and inter-party democracy, to celebrate the gallantry of the nation’s apex court, for that historic judegment with Governor Amaechi merely the vessel for such justice delivery.
That in short was what the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloysius Kastina-Alu, meant in his lead ruling of October 25, 2007, when he said, ‘ “the justice of the case demands that this court do substantial justice. The only way to redress his right, which was violated by the illegal substitution, is to declare him the winner of the April 14 governorship election in Rivers State”.
This without a doubt is the right way to appreciate the import and potency of October 25, in the annals of our democratic experience, and not to diminish it simply in exercise of personal vendetta against the Rivers Governor.