Blog Details

Across several states, the All Progressives Congress is grappling with internal unease—one that reflects a deeper, nationwide concern about the integrity of party primaries. Many argue that state governors are setting the APC up for defeat in their states by manipulating the process. Iyobosa Uwugiaren examines the issues.

Day after day, mounting complaints across several states are casting a shadow over the APC primaries, with party members alleging that governors are imposing preferred candidates and sidelining grassroots choices.

Nowhere is the tension more pronounced than in Edo South, where resistance to a push by powerful figures—including FCT Minister Nyesom Wike—has exposed deep cracks within the party and raised fresh concerns about the state of internal democracy in Nigeria.

In Benin City, conversations among party loyalists carry an unusual edge. In ward and local government meetings, private homes, and roadside gatherings, a familiar refrain keeps surfacing: the outcome of the coming APC primaries has already been decided.

The apprehension stems from a growing perception that influential actors are working to install their preferred candidate in Edo South. That belief has, in turn, triggered resistance from supporters of Osagie Ize-Iyamu, who is widely regarded within his base as the more popular option. Apparently to counter Ize-Iyamu’s popularity, Governor Monday Okpebholo is alleged to have threatened to sack any political appointee who supports Ize-Iyamu’s aspiration.

Whether these allegations are true, exaggerated, or politically motivated, their effect is already evident. Across Edo, the APC is grappling with internal unease—one that reflects a deeper, nationwide concern about the integrity of party primaries. Many argue that the Edo State governor appears to be preparing the APC for defeat in the state, judging by his conduct.

What is unfolding in Edo is not happening in isolation. Across several states, party members and aspirants have raised similar complaints about the conduct of APC primaries and the influence of governors in determining outcomes.

In Nasarawa State, aspirants have publicly expressed concern over what they describe as attempts to control delegate lists and tilt the process in favour of preferred candidates. In Gombe, murmurs within party ranks suggest dissatisfaction with the perceived dominance of the state leadership in shaping who emerges.

Lagos, long considered a stronghold of structured party control, has not been an exemption. While discipline within the party has often been cited by political analysts as a strength, critics argue that the same structure can limit open competition, particularly when influential actors signal clear preferences ahead of primaries.

In Rivers State, political tensions have been further complicated by the involvement of high-profile figures, including Wike, whose influence continues to generate debate across party lines.

Meanwhile, in Edo, the current dispute has become one of the most visible flashpoints in the broader conversation about internal democracy. Taken together, these instances point to a pattern: a growing perception that the space for competitive primaries within the APC is narrowing, and that APC governors are preparing the party for significant defeat in their states.

At the center of these concerns is a fundamental democratic principle—legitimacy. Primaries are intended to serve as the first test of a candidate’s acceptability within a party. They provide a platform for aspirants to engage with members, present their ideas, and build support. When that process is seen as compromised, the legitimacy of the eventual candidate comes into question.

In Edo, the dispute illustrates how quickly confidence can erode. Party members who feel excluded from decision-making processes are disengaging from the APC—some reportedly moving toward the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC). While some withdraw quietly, others are challenging the process openly, creating divisions that could persist into the 2027 general election and the 2028 Edo State governorship election.

The legitimacy deficit does not remain confined within party walls. It spills into the public domain, shaping how voters perceive candidates and, by extension, the electoral process itself. Political parties depend heavily on grassroots structures. Ward leaders, youth mobilizers, and local coordinators form the backbone of campaign efforts, and their commitment often determines the reach and effectiveness of a party’s message. When candidates are perceived to be imposed, these structures weaken.

In several states where complaints have emerged, party insiders report declining enthusiasm among grassroots members. Meetings that once attracted large numbers now see reduced attendance. Volunteers who previously drove mobilization efforts are less willing to invest time and resources.

Edo reflects this trend. The perception of imposition has created a sense of detachment among some party faithful, raising concerns about the APC’s ability to sustain a strong grassroots campaign in the state, especially in Edo South, which accounts for about 60% of the voting population.

The most immediate consequence of the fear of imposed candidates is factionalization. Aggrieved aspirants and their supporters are defecting to opposition parties or choosing to remain within the APC while withholding support from the official candidate.

Nigerian political history since 1999 provides numerous examples of parties weakened by internal divisions. In tightly contested states, even minor fractures can prove decisive.

In Gombe and Nasarawa, for instance, reports of dissatisfaction have raised concerns about potential splits within party ranks. In Rivers, existing political tensions amplify the risk of fragmentation. In Lagos, where party cohesion has traditionally been strong, even subtle discontent could have ripple effects.

Edo, however, stands out because of the intensity of the current dispute. If not managed effectively, the situation could evolve into a full-blown factional crisis.