Insight: How APC’s Ticket Wars Exposed Cracks in Internal Democracy

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has long presented itself as a party committed to internal democracy, often insisting that its candidates emerge through transparent and competitive primaries.

However, the party’s senatorial primaries ahead of the 2027 general election told a different story.

From Delta to Kogi, Kebbi to Plateau, Ondo to Ogun, the exercise was fraughted with allegations of manipulation, parallel exercises, vote-buying, pre-written results, exclusion of aspirants and the overwhelming influence of governors and the party leadership.

While every election naturally produces winners and losers, the controversy surrounding the APC primaries is less about defeat than about the integrity of the process itself.

Many of the aggrieved aspirants are not claiming they simply lost an election; they are alleging that, in several instances, the elections they were expected to contest never genuinely took place.

The outcome has once again revived concerns over whether Nigeria’s ruling party truly practises the internal democracy it routinely preaches.

THE RISE OF THE ‘ANOINTED’ CANDIDATE

One striking feature of the APC primaries was the dominance of governors, former governors and politically influential figures.

Seven serving governors secured senatorial tickets, while at least 12 former governors also emerged as candidates.

In many states, incumbent senators who sought re-election found themselves displaced by politically stronger figures or aspirants believed to enjoy the backing of state governors or the party hierarchy.

The pattern reinforced a perception that political influence, rather than delegate preference alone, often determines outcomes within the party.

Although the APC maintains that its primaries complied with its constitution and guidelines, several defeated aspirants insist the process departed from established procedures.

SENATORS WHO CRIED FOUL

Among the most vocal critics is Ned Nwoko, senator representing Delta north.

Nwoko rejected the declaration of former Delta governor Ifeanyi Okowa as the APC senatorial candidate, insisting the announced results did not reflect what transpired across the district’s 98 wards.

He demanded ward-by-ward results and videos from polling units, arguing that the declaration was based on only one ward while claiming that he actually won the exercise.

His legal team has since approached the party’s appeal committee, alleging manipulation, intimidation, vote-buying and pre-written results.

In Kogi east, Jibrin Isah similarly insisted that no valid primary election took place despite the emergence of another candidate.

In Kebbi south, Garba Maidoki resigned from the APC shortly before the primaries, citing unresolved internal disputes before eventually defecting to the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Other serving senators, including Pam Dachungyang (Plateau north), Lola Ashiru (Kwara south), Eteng Williams (Cross River central), Diket Plang (Plateau central) and Titus Zam (Benue north-west)c, also failed to secure tickets, with some supporters questioning the transparency of the exercises in their respective states.

GOVERNORS’ GROWING INFLUENCE

Perhaps no institution wielded greater influence during the primaries than state governors. Governors remain the undisputed leaders of party structures within their states, controlling delegates, party executives and campaign machinery.

This influence appeared evident in several contests.

In Delta, political observers linked Okowa’s emergence to the backing of Governor Sheriff Oborevwori.

In Gombe, Danjuma Goje’s supporters accused Inuwa Yahaya, the state governor, of deploying state political structures against the former governor.

In Ogun, former governor Gbenga Daniel withdrew from the senatorial race shortly before Dapo Abiodun, the state governor, emerged as the party’s consensus candidate.

Across several states, allegations emerged that governors influenced delegate lists and consensus arrangements before voting even commenced.

While consensus candidacy is recognised under the Electoral Act and party guidelines, critics argue that genuine consensus requires the voluntary withdrawal of all aspirants, not political pressure or predetermined outcomes.

WHAT THE RULES SAY

Ironically, many of the lawmakers complaining today were among those who passed the Electoral Act and repeatedly defended internal democracy within political parties.

The APC constitution and the Electoral Act prescribe procedures for conducting primary elections, including proper notice, accreditation of delegates, transparent voting, collation of results and the establishment of appeal mechanisms.

The rules are intended to guarantee fairness and legitimacy. Yet, several aggrieved aspirants contend that these procedures were either ignored or selectively applied.

Some alleged that delegate lists were altered at the last minute. Others claimed that election materials arrived after results had already been announced. Still, others argued that voting never occurred in some locations.

These claims remain allegations, but their frequency across different states has raised questions about the credibility of the exercise.

Senate President Godswill Akpabio appeared to acknowledge this political reality when he told senators that the leadership was working to ensure there would be “very few disappointments” among serving lawmakers affected by the primaries.

Although he did not elaborate on what those efforts entail, his remarks reflected growing concern within the senate over the political fallout from the APC’s internal contests.

SECTION 87 OF THE ELECTORAL ACT: A RECURRING POINT OF CONTENTION

Beyond questions of compliance with the APC’s constitution and guidelines, many of the party’s nomination exercises also appear to have raised issues under Section 87 of the Electoral Act 2026, which sets out the legal framework for the adoption of consensus candidates.

Section 87(1) provides that where a political party adopts a consensus candidate, it must obtain the written consent of all cleared aspirants, indicating their voluntary withdrawal from the race and endorsement of the consensus candidate.

Where a party is unable to secure the written consent of every cleared aspirant, Section 87(2) mandates that it must revert to direct primaries for the nomination of candidates.

The law further provides in Section 87(3) that a special convention or nomination congress must be held to ratify the choice of consensus candidates at the appropriate national, state or constituency level.

A review of the APC’s nomination process suggests that these statutory requirements were allegedly breached in several instances. Across a number of states, aspirants publicly denied withdrawing from contests, rejected the declaration of consensus candidates, or alleged that no valid ratification congress was conducted. In some cases, parallel congresses and competing lists of candidates further complicated the process.

If established, such actions would amount not only to breaches of internal party procedures but could also constitute violations of the Electoral Act, exposing the nominations to legal scrutiny. Unlike party guidelines, Section 87 imposes statutory obligations, making compliance a legal requirement rather than a matter of internal party discretion.

THE COST OF WEAK INTERNAL DEMOCRACY

Internal democracy is often described as the foundation upon which democratic governance rests.

Political parties are expected to provide members equal opportunities to compete for elective offices through transparent processes.

When party members lose confidence in internal mechanisms, litigation, defections and anti-party activities become inevitable.

Nigeria’s political history offers several examples where disputed primaries eventually weakened parties during the general election. The APC itself benefited from such internal crises within opposition parties in previous election cycles.

Whether the ruling party can avoid a similar fate in 2027 may depend on how it manages grievances arising from these primaries. Already, some aggrieved aspirants have approached appeal panels, while others are considering litigation if internal remedies fail.

A WARNING SIGNAL FOR 2027?

The controversies surrounding the APC primaries extend beyond the ambitions of individual politicians.

They raise broader questions about Nigeria’s democratic culture. If political parties struggle to conduct transparent internal elections among their own members, public confidence in the wider electoral process may also suffer.

To be clear, not every defeated aspirant was necessarily denied victory through manipulation. Several lawmakers undoubtedly lost because delegates preferred alternative candidates.

However, where allegations of irregularities emerge simultaneously across multiple states, they deserve scrutiny rather than dismissal.

The APC remains the country’s largest political party and controls both the presidency and the national assembly. Its internal processes inevitably shape the quality of Nigeria’s democracy.

As preparations for the 2027 general election gather momentum, the party faces a critical challenge: convincing both its members and the wider public that its candidates emerged through transparent, credible and democratic processes.

Otherwise, the controversies that characterised its primaries may become a preview of even bigger disputes in the elections ahead.

Source: TheCable