The race for positions ahead of the 2027 elections has begun with the questionable selection of candidates under the guise of consensus. But from the kick-off, the process has been rigged by governors and top party hierarchies. From the North to the South, in the name of applying the consensus option in the selection of party candidates, the process is being manipulated to foist lackeys on the people.
The outcry across Nigeria over the abuse of the provisions of the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2026 has been loud, especially from within the camp of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Never before have state governors, under any political party, been so empowered to decide who obtains tickets for National Assembly, Houses of Assembly and governorship elections next year.
Initially, it was assumed that the removal of indirect primaries from the procedures for choosing party candidates for elections would weaken the stranglehold of governors over parties. Under the provisions for indirect primaries in the Electoral Act 2022, only party leaders and elected government officials voted to determine candidates for elections. The system gave governors the leverage to select their cronies, apologists and loyalists to contest important elective positions. The Electoral Act 2026 removed that option, preferring direct primary elections, where every member of the party at all levels has a say in who becomes a candidate for various elective positions. The consensus option in primary elections was intended to ensure unity of purpose during elections. From reports across the states, the APC has adopted the consensus option in the primary elections, but without garnering the buy-in of other candidates, as envisaged by law.
Expectedly, disputes have engulfed the states. In Osun, Bola Oyebamiji emerged as the consensus candidate after nine aspirants withdrew, earning praise for party unity. Conversely, in Yobe, six aspirants rejected Governor Buni’s endorsement of Baba Wali, insisting it breached the Electoral Act and the APC constitution. In Oyo and Lagos, aspirants defied elders’ endorsements by purchasing nomination forms, signalling a preference for direct primaries. In Gombe State, the APC’s attempt at consensus candidacy has been highly contested. Jamilu Isyaku Gwamna was adopted as the party’s consensus governorship candidate, but supporters of Professor Isa Pantami and Senator Saidu Alkali rejected the process, insisting it violated the Electoral Act and the APC’s national directive.
Under Section 87(1) of the amended Electoral Act 2026, consensus candidacy in party primaries is strictly regulated to prevent imposition. The law allows consensus only if all cleared aspirants voluntarily agree to step down for one candidate. Crucially, this agreement must be documented through written evidence signed by each aspirant, confirming support for the chosen candidate. As provided by the Act, even if one aspirant refuses to sign the document, the party is legally bound to conduct direct primaries. This safeguard ensures fairness, protects internal democracy and is meant to prevent governors or party leaders from unilaterally imposing candidates. By requiring written consent, the Act emphasises transparency and accountability, ensuring that consensus reflects genuine unity rather than coercion. But so far, this has not been adhered to strictly.
The imposition of candidates in party primaries is fundamentally contrary to the principle of democracy because it undermines the core values of participation, competition and representation. Democracy thrives on freedom of choice, where party members and citizens can openly select candidates through transparent and competitive processes. When governors impose consensus candidates without genuine consultation, they deny party members the right to exercise their voices and reduce elections to mere formalities.
Apart from alienating qualified, competent and popular candidates from contesting the 2027 elections, it is feared that the imposition of candidates could lead to low voter turnout in the elections. When serious aspirants are sidelined through undemocratic consensus arrangements, supporters often feel disenfranchised and disengage from the electoral cycle. This can weaken grassroots participation, reduce enthusiasm for campaigns and ultimately depress turnout on Election Day. Beyond turnout, the imposition of candidates could fuel internal party crises, defections and litigation that distract from issue-based politics. In recent months, political parties have witnessed many defections, and any steps that could trigger more internal crises would be ridiculous and should be avoided. Worse still, impositions erode trust in institutions, as citizens perceive elections as predetermined rather than competitive. If unchecked, these practices could deepen voter apathy, weaken the legitimacy of elected officials and heighten political instability in 2027.
We insist that party members at all levels must be allowed to participate meaningfully in candidate selection, with mechanisms put in place to protect minority voices and aspirants from intimidation. We also call on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to monitor internal party primaries more closely by enforcing transparency and sanctioning violations. Furthermore, we encourage all Nigerians who have been unjustly disqualified from contesting elections to use every available legal instrument to seek redress instead of capitulating to the mischief of some ‘powerful governors.’ We stand firmly on the generally accepted principle that democracy thrives on choice, accountability and competition – values that must be defended against elite manipulation.