 |
| Kola Ologbondiyan |
The African Democratic Congress Presidential Campaign Council (ADC-PCC) has sharply escalated its critique of the ruling All Progressives Congress, branding the inauguration of an expanded APC presidential campaign council as a calculated assault on Nigeria’s multiparty democracy and a step toward one-party dominance. In a strongly worded statement on Wednesday, Kola Ologbondiyan, the ADC-PCC’s director of media and publicity, described the inclusion of prominent opposition-affiliated governors and figures as “political abduction” and “political banditry,” arguing that the move undermines the competitive foundation of the country’s democratic system less than three months before the January 2027 general elections.
The controversy centres on the APC’s revised campaign structure, released and inaugurated around mid-October 2026. It notably includes Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory and a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) member, as coordinator for Rivers State and the FCT; Ademola Adeleke, the Osun State governor elected under the Accord Party, as coordinator for Osun; and Chukwuma Soludo, the Anambra State governor of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), as coordinator for Anambra. Other cross-party or recently aligned figures, such as Delta State Governor Sheriff Oborevwori (who had moved from the PDP), also feature in the expanded list.
President Bola Tinubu chairs the council, with a large roster of APC governors serving as state coordinators and high-profile roles assigned to figures like Senate President Godswill Akpabio and others.
Ologbondiyan’s statement framed the development not as ordinary political coalition-building but as evidence of systematic pressure. “What we are witnessing is not politics but political abduction,” he said. “You cannot claim to be a democrat while using state power to force opposition governors into your party and then drafting them into your campaign council. This is political banditry.” He alleged that the APC is pursuing an agenda that concentrates power in the hands of one individual, deploying national institutions, security agencies, and the judiciary to weaken opposition forces.
The ADC-PCC spokesman linked the council expansion to deeper structural concerns. He accused the ruling party of showing scant regard for the economic hardship, hunger, and insecurity facing ordinary Nigerians, arguing that its priority remains power retention. “These particular sets of leaders don’t care about the current conditions of the people but how best to remain in power at a time when average Nigerians find it difficult to eat and be secure,” Ologbondiyan stated. He painted a picture of democracy under severe strain: suppression of dissenting voices, harassment of opposition figures, and the erosion of institutions for partisan ends. “Never in our democratic journey have we witnessed this level of intolerance and desperation. The APC government has weaponised poverty, hunger and insecurity to subjugate Nigerians and cripple the opposition. This is not the democracy for which Chief M.K.O. Abiola and other martyrs paid the supreme price,” he added.
Positioning the ADC’s ticket as a democratic alternative, Ologbondiyan described presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar as a committed democrat with the national spread, capacity, and will to reunite the country and restore public confidence in institutions. He paired Atiku with running mate Rotimi Amaechi, emphasising their experience.
“Atiku Abubakar is a democrat to the core… The fate of Nigeria’s democracy rests on him to save it from total collapse,” he said. The statement closed with a call to Nigerians, media organisations, civil society groups, and the international community to resist what the ADC termed an anti-democratic agenda.
This is not an isolated outburst. Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar himself responded to the expanded council, calling it “a crowded confession of Tinubu’s fear.” Through his strategic communications director, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku argued that the length of the list reflected a president more focused on gathering politicians than accounting for the hardships Nigerians have endured. He criticised the use of the Presidential Villa for the inauguration as an abuse of public office, stating that the Villa “belongs to the Nigerian people” and is not a party campaign venue. Atiku portrayed the outreach to figures outside the APC as an attempt to collect politicians “like shields against public judgment.”
RECOMMENDED ✒︎ Loyalty Test for Adeleke: Lagos Accord Leaders Demand Clarity as Governor Coordinates Tinubu’s 2027 Campaign
Context: Defections, Rainbow Coalitions, and the Shrinking Opposition Space
The ADC’s alarm sits within a broader pattern that has reshaped Nigerian politics since the 2023 elections. A wave of defections—particularly from the once-dominant PDP—has left the main opposition party with only a handful of governors and sharply reduced numbers in the National Assembly. Several governors elected on opposition platforms have either formally joined the APC or publicly aligned with Tinubu’s re-election bid.
Soludo has repeatedly affirmed support rooted in long personal ties and policy alignment; Adeleke endorsed Tinubu after securing re-election under Accord; Wike has long operated as a key ally while remaining formally in the PDP and promoting a “Rainbow Coalition” that supports the president without requiring full party switches for all participants.
Critics of the ruling party, including earlier statements from ADC figures and other opposition voices, have long warned of a deliberate strategy to create a sense of inevitability around Tinubu’s victory and to leave voters with limited credible alternatives. Some analysts and opposition leaders describe this as movement toward a de facto one-party system, even if formal multiparty structures remain. Supporters of the APC counter that such realignments reflect democratic choice, the attractiveness of the government’s reforms, and pragmatic recognition of political realities rather than coercion. Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele, for instance, welcomed the inclusions as evidence of a genuine “rainbow coalition” advancing the national interest. Some APC stakeholders, however, have privately or publicly expressed discomfort at outsiders holding formal roles within the party’s campaign apparatus.
Nigeria’s Fourth Republic has always featured fluid party loyalties and cross-carpeting. What distinguishes the current moment is the scale, the timing so close to a presidential contest, the formal incorporation of non-members into the ruling party’s campaign hierarchy, and the simultaneous weakening of institutional opposition. Economic pressures—persistent inflation, cost-of-living challenges, and insecurity—provide a potent backdrop. Opposition narratives argue that hardship is being “weaponised” to dampen dissent; the government maintains that difficult reforms are necessary and that political competition remains open.
Coercion, Pragmatism, or Structural Weakness?
The ADC’s language of “abduction” and “banditry” is deliberately maximalist. It seeks to frame participation by Wike, Soludo, and Adeleke not as free political agency but as the product of state pressure or inducement. Evidence of direct coercion is contested and difficult to verify independently; the governors have attended the inauguration and, in some cases, previously signalled support. At the same time, the optics of opposition governors coordinating campaigns for the ruling party while retaining their original labels raise legitimate questions about the health of competitive multiparty politics. When major state executives effectively work for the incumbent’s re-election machinery, the distinction between party and state can blur in the public mind.
A deeper issue is the opposition’s own fragmentation. Multiple parties and ambitious personalities have struggled to coalesce around a single viable alternative, diluting anti-incumbent sentiment. Legal and internal crises have further hobbled platforms such as the PDP and others. In this environment, the ruling party’s ability to absorb or neutralise potential challengers becomes self-reinforcing. Whether this constitutes a plot for dictatorship or simply effective political organisation is the core dispute.
The invocation of M.K.O. Abiola and pro-democracy martyrs is potent symbolism. It positions the current struggle as a continuation of the fight against authoritarianism rather than ordinary electoral competition. For the ADC, Atiku represents continuity with that democratic tradition and a vehicle for national reunification. For the APC, the expanded council demonstrates breadth of support and the capacity to build broad coalitions beyond strict party lines—something Tinubu has long practised in Lagos politics and nationally.
Stakes for 2027 and Beyond
As campaigns formally intensify, the episode underscores the fragility of institutional trust.
Allegations of institutional capture, selective enforcement, and shrinking political space will likely intensify. Civil society, the media, and international observers will be watching closely whether opposition parties can organise freely, hold rallies without interference, and compete on relatively equal terms. The ADC’s call for resistance frames the contest as existential for multiparty democracy itself.
Ultimately, Nigerian voters will decide in January 2027 whether the current realignments reflect genuine popularity and performance or the cumulative effects of pressure and institutional advantage. The ADC’s forceful intervention ensures that the debate over one-party tendencies will remain central to the campaign narrative. What is clear is that the formal boundaries between parties are more porous than at any time in recent memory, and the implications for competitive democracy will unfold in real time over the coming months.
Samuel O. Sulaimon is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Naijapiz. He covers News, Sports, Finance, Faiths, Education, Politics and Technology.
Post a Comment