The Nation Newspaper

Tag: one-party state

  • One-party state not possible in Nigeria, says Gambari

    One-party state not possible in Nigeria, says Gambari

    Former Chief of Staff to late President Muhammadu Buhari and founder Savannah Centre for Diplomacy, Democracy and Development (SCDDD), Professor Ibrahim Gambari had ruled out the possibility of Nigeria turning into a one-party state.

    He spoke in Abuja during a media interactive session on the activities of his 11-year-old centre for policy research, dialogue, advocacy, and training in key areas of diplomacy, democracy and development.

    Reviewing political development in the country ahead of the 2027 general elections and alleged fears by the opposition parties of the country turning to a one-party state, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs said he is not nursing the fears of the opposition, arguing that all indices are still in favour of the country’s multi party system.

    According to him: “I’m not at all worried about this country becoming a one-party state. You know what? You can quote me. It will not happen if history is any guide. You know, we don’t even know our own history.”

    Reminiscing on the political evolution of the country,  Gambari noted the ruling party was not the first dominant party in Nigeria 

    “This administration is not the first to try to have a dominant party in Nigeria. Right from the beginning, the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC)  was a dominant party in the First Republic. They were not the ones who caused the crisis in the main opposition, but they didn’t discourage it. In fact, they took sides. Where has that led us? It didn’t lead us to peace or development; it led to chaos.

    “The National Party of Nigeria (NPN) was next. They became so confident they felt that they would be there forever. What happened to that? In the end, it didn’t work. Third one, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), not long ago, they were boasting that they would rule for 60 years. Where are they today? So any effort to make this country one party will not work.”

    Advancing reasons further for the non-viability of the concept, the former United Nations Under-Secretary General argued that most political elites in the country are too ambitious for the ambition to be contained within one political party. 

    Read Also: Foreign lenders sue FBN Trustees, Sulu Gambari overalleged illegal creation of security in Neconde -Nestoil case

    He, however, said that the political class has failed to learn from history and the negative consequences of previous attempts, insisting that the country would “continue to repeat history’s mistakes.”

    Proffering solutions on how to avoid past experiences,  the season diplomat stressed the need for building and promoting a formidable political party system

    “We must pay attention to how political parties are organized in this country because if we have strong political parties, nobody will even try to make a one-party state. It will not be possible. But because we have no organized political parties, our political parties have become just vehicles to gain political power. That’s all. Because our constitution does not allow for independent candidates, you have to belong, so it’s a party of convenience.

    “Political parties are flags of convenience. You know, when you look at ships, you can have an American ship flying a Panama flag. So political parties are just carrying flags of convenience to gain power, not organized based on ideology or perspectives that make one distinct from the other. 

    “In the First Republic, if you crossed from NPC to NCNC or Action Group, it was a big deal. There were clear differences. But today, because there is no real distinction, you can move—as I jokingly say—you can be APC in the morning, PDP in the afternoon, and APC again the next day, no questions asked, because there are no consequences.

    “In some other systems, if you move after being elected under one platform, your seat is declared vacant, and you have to contest again because otherwise you are living under false pretenses. We elected you under one pretense, and now you have decided to dump it.”

    Stressing  for effective citizen participation in governance, Gambari maintained: “History is not on the side of a one-party state in Nigeria or anywhere else. But it will not happen by itself. Multiparty democracy requires commitment and organization, and we all have roles to play.”

  • One-party state is loading: true or false?

    One-party state is loading: true or false?

    By Magnus Onyibe

    As a student, I was often intrigued by open-ended examination questions such as “No Nile, No Egypt. Discuss.” Such questions demanded analytical reasoning grounded in historical facts. That early fascination inspired the title of this intervention: “One-Party State Is Loading in Nigeria: True or False?”

    Any assessment of Nigeria’s democracy must acknowledge one reality: political bias inevitably shapes judgment. Thus, the question of whether Nigeria is sliding into a one-party state is often answered emotionally rather than empirically.

    Those who argue that the danger is real point to the massive defections from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Nigeria’s former ruling party. Once dominant between 1999 and 2015, the PDP today resembles a political patient in intensive care. It has been hemorrhaging governors and leaders, unable to heal internal fractures despite repeated reconciliation efforts since its defeat by the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2015.

    The party’s recent national convention in Ibadan, intended as a reset, may yet prove pyrrhic. Deep factionalisation, parallel conventions, and ongoing legal battles—particularly involving the rival faction led by Nyesom Wike, former Rivers State governor, and current FCT minister—have crisis rather than resolved it.

    In contrast, the ruling APC appears politically stable, making comparisons between the two parties akin to juxtaposing ancient Athens—the birthplace of democracy—with modern-day Washington, DC.

    It is particularly disappointing that the PDP, which midwifed Nigeria’s return to multiparty democracy in 1999 after years of military rule, governed for 16 years before collapsing into opposition disarray. A decade on, the party remains trapped in a deep malaise.

    This dysfunction largely explains the growing wave of defections to the APC, a trend that is fast becoming the norm.

    The Labour Party (LP), which surged to national prominence through Peter Obi’s impressive third-place finish in the 2023 presidential election, is not immune either. Internal democracy deficits and allegations of financial impropriety have plunged the party into factional strife, mirroring the PDP’s troubles.

    Against this backdrop, fears that Nigeria may be drifting towards a one-party state are understandable. Politicians in failing opposition parties are quick to sound the alarm—whether out of genuine concern or political self-preservation.

    But the critical question remains: Does the weakness of opposition parties necessarily mean the death of democracy in Nigeria?

    This dysfunction explains the growing wave of defections to the APC, a trend increasingly interpreted as evidence that Nigeria is sliding towards one-party rule. But that conclusion is far from settled.

    Contradicting this narrative is another school of thought that holds that a one-party state is not “loading” in Nigeria. Despite the avalanche of defections to the APC, countervailing movements suggest a reconfiguration—not a collapse—of opposition politics.

    For instance, Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke has reportedly defected to the Accord Party, a platform once considered near moribund. More significantly, key PDP founding figures—including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and former Senate President David Mark—along with thousands of party members, have migrated to the revitalised African Democratic Congress (ADC).

    Politics is inherently dynamic. In this case, the ADC appears to have been politically “acquired” by heavyweight defectors from the PDP—unlike the formal merger that birthed the APC in 2013. The ADC has made no pretence about its ambition to challenge the APC for control of Aso Rock in 2027 and has already embarked on an aggressive membership drive, ahead of the APC’s planned convention in March 2026.

    Waziri Adamawa, Atiku Abubakar’s recent formal entry into the ADC at a rally in Jada, Adamawa State, underscores the party’s renewed momentum. Meanwhile, Peter Obi—widely assumed to be aligned with the ADC—has yet to formally declare, suggesting strategic caution rather than political irrelevance.

    Beyond the ADC, Nigeria’s political map further weakens the one-party thesis. In Kano State, the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), led by Dr Musa Kwankwaso and powered by the Kwankwasiyya movement, remains firmly in control. In Anambra State, Governor Chukwuma Soludo of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) secured a landslide re-election victory in November, defeating the APC candidate by over 400,000 votes—clear evidence that APGA, not the APC, rules the roost.

    Similarly, in Abia State, Governor Alex Otti of the Labor Party (LP) has sustained multiparty vibrancy through performance-driven governance. While internal party disputes pose challenges, LP’s control of Abia further undermines claims of an APC monopoly.

    Taken together, these realities raise a critical question: how can Nigeria be described as descending into a one-party state when LP, APGA, NNPP, ADC, Accord, and even the weakened PDP still control states, mobilise voters, and credibly compete for power?

    The decline of the PDP—once Nigeria’s dominant ruling party—should not be conflated with the collapse of democracy itself. Parties rise and fall; democracy survives through competition, not permanently. What Nigeria appears to be experiencing is not a one-party state but a phase of dominant-party politics.

    Dominance, however, is not the same as monopoly. As long as opposition parties win elections, govern states, and challenge for national power, Nigeria—however imperfectly—remains a multiparty democracy.

    At this juncture, it is pertinent to share with readers how the post below shared with me by a senior member of the commentariat prompted this analogical intervention.

    The following is the data that was shared:

    “The People’s Democratic Party: The journey to single-digit states

    Ruling Party Trajectory

    1999 — Presidency & 22 states

    2003 — Presidency & 26 States

    2007 — Presidency & 29 States

    2011 — Presidency & 25 States

    2015 — 13 States

    2019 — 16 States

    2023 — 13 States

    2025 — 6 States

    The six States:

    •Adamawa

    •Bauchi

    •Oyo

    •Plateau

    •Taraba

    •Zamfara

    NC  NE NW SW”

    It is astonishing that since the above statistics were generated, the PDP has further shrunk in its ranks from six (6) states to three (3), as Plateau, Taraba, and Adamawa have also fallen under the spell of the APC. This development has occurred as the ruling party—now going beyond a conventional political organisation—has effectively morphed into a movement, enabling it to roll over formerly opposition-controlled states.

    Consequently, the leadership of the remaining three PDP-controlled states is now in a quandary over how to withstand the ferocity of the ruling APC while remaining within an increasingly weakened and handicapped PDP.

    Being naturally inquisitive, I chose to look beneath the surface of the data, ignoring the drumbeats and celebratory dances of those alleging that Nigeria is descending into a one-party state simply because the PDP is now in the ICU and seemingly in the throes of death.

    By stripping away the noise and focusing on reality, one can discern that during the current political cycle, three nearly moribund parties—LP, ADC, and Accord—have been resuscitated, while a new party, the NNPP, has emerged within the same political dispensation. So, the diminishing fortunes of the PDP do not equate to the imminent death of democracy, as some would have us believe.

    History is instructive in validating this assertion. Empires rise and fall—an inevitable reality. Greece, once the cradle of democracy, is today but a shadow of its former self. Britain, which once ruled nearly three-quarters of the world—from Africa to India, the Caribbean, Canada, Australia, and even the United States—has since contracted into England, Ireland, and Wales, collectively known as the United Kingdom.

    Therefore, while it is understandable to mourn the decline of the former ruling party, PDP, it is disingenuous to portray its internal crisis—now leaving it in control of only three states—as evidence that Nigeria’s over 25 years of continuous multiparty democracy is degenerating into a one-party state.

    Incidentally, Nigeria has witnessed a similar political scenario in the past, as highlighted by the socio-economic and political analysisby a  firm Statisense. During the era when the PDP was the ruling party, particularly under President Olusegun Obasanjo’s second term between 2003 and 2007, the party controlled all the South-East and South-South states and most of the South-West and north central as well as a bit of north east and west, with Lagos State as the lone exception.

    Subsequently, following court rulings that nullified several elections, the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), which had lost the South-West to the PDP, strategically plotted its return to national relevance by merging with three and a half other opposition parties to form the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2013. This coalition enabled the APC to reclaim lost ground and eventually seize power.

    Today, it is remarkable that the APC—owing largely to the organisational skills of President Bola Tinubu—has reinvented itself from controlling only Lagos State in 2007, to becoming the ruling party in all but six of Nigeria’s 36 states as 2025 draws to a close.

    At this juncture, it bears reiterating that if a one-party state were ever to emerge in Nigeria, it would reflect Tinubu’s political dexterity as a seasoned strategist—and, conversely, the failure of opposition party leaders to inspire committed followership due to weak internal democracy within their platforms, including the PDP, LP, SDP, and ADC.

    The argument that Tinubu is secretly funding the undertakers of opposition parties currently exhibiting signs of terminal illness is both lame and untenable.

    In politics, opposition parties routinely deploy all available tactics—demarketing, blackmail, intimidation, and deception—to outwit rivals. A classic example was Senator Bukola Saraki’s emergence as Senate President against the wishes of then-President Muhammadu Buhari. Through political manoeuvring, Saraki outsmarted party leaders(diverting hostile senators away from the chambers while the loyal ones remained to vote in his favor) and thus secured the position as senate president against the plan of the leadership of his party but with support from dissident APC senators and opposition PDP lawmakers. That episode was realpolitik at its finest.

    This reality underpins the popular saying that politics is a dirty game—a negative but globally entrenched label, with Nigeria being no exception.

    Given this context, political parties worthy of the name should protect their flanks, much like households secure their homes against intruders. Instead of ensuring internal cohesion, opposition parties facing self-inflicted implosions have chosen to blame the APC and Tinubu for their misfortune.

    For instance, the PDP’s crisis deepened in 2023 when the party violated its zoning principle by shifting the presidential ticket northward, producing Atiku Abubakar as its candidate instead of rotating power to the South-East. In protest, Peter Obi—Atiku’s former running mate in 2019—defected to the Labour Party, becoming its presidential flagbearer.

    That political divorce resulted in Obi and the LP sweeping votes across the South and East to finish third, with 6,101,533, while PDP and Atiku secured a distant second place with 6,984,530 votes, largely from parts of the North, as Tinubu and APC garnered 8,794,726 in the 2023 presidential election.

    If opposition leaders in the PDP failed to consolidate their gains from 2019, lacked foresight, and could not forge a united front in 2023—ultimately losing to Tinubu—why should anyone else be blamed for their misfortune?

    President Tinubu, by contrast, demonstrated political sagacity by persuading rival contenders to step down during the APC primaries and by patiently building a national coalition over several years before winning the presidency.

    Given this level of diligence and strategic effort, how can the failures of Nigeria’s opposition parties—now metaphorically sleepwalking into oblivion—be blamed on Tinubu or the APC?

    Interestingly, in states such as Osun in the South and Zamfara in the North, the APC has reportedly rebuffed overtures from incumbent PDP governors seeking to defect, confident in its organisational strength and electoral machinery. Rather than accommodating distressed politicians, the party has chosen to block their entry.

    In the past, it was fashionable to accuse the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of coercing governors into defecting. That line of argument has now become obsolete, as no credible evidence supports such claims in the current dispensation.

    The advice to opposition parties, especially the PDP, therefore, is simple: end the blame game and address internal vulnerabilities. Political parties hemorrhaging their top members—particularly governors—must confront their self-inflicted wounds.

    As a precautionary note to the APC, however, its current dominance should not be mistaken for a fait accompli. The party must remember the aphorisms: uneasy lies the head that wears the crown and what goes up must come down.

    Read Also: Mikel berates  NFF on Super Eagles’ preps for AFCON 2025

    The road ahead will be rough if the APC fails to consolidate economic reforms and translate improving macroeconomic indicators into tangible relief for ordinary Nigerians. Reduced petrol prices must meaningfully reflect in lower transport costs, less expensive food prices, affordable housing, and good healthcare—critical components of daily life.

    At this juncture in Nigeria’s history, public messaging by the leadership should emphasise patience and hope, acknowledging the inevitable lag between policy implementation and real-world impact.

    In other words, APC must strive to convince weary Nigerians that joy is coming.

    Although the implosion of the APC was once predicted due to its formation from ideologically diverse parties in 2013—strange bedfellows by any measure—it has instead grown stronger, much to the consternation of its adversaries.

    But by the simple rule of life, every society or firm goes through boom and bust. The PDP is going through that motion. Indeed the longevity of an entity or society is dependent on the dexterity of the leaders in managing success.

    APC has thrived well as it has been enjoying a boom period stretching over the past ten years.

    It must be remembered that leadership can be tenous if it fails to be inclusive and responsive to the yearnings of members of the society.

    In the case of political parties, if internal democracy is not enforced by way of inclusion of critical stakeholders, and in situations whereby the opposition parties fail to play their critical of keeping the ruling party in check, civil society/liberty organizations such as YlAGA Africa, Enough-Is-Enough, SERAP, CISLAC, etc that abound in Nigeria can step in by holding the feet of our political leaders to the fire.

    In the final analysis, the prospect of Nigeria descending into one party is not to worry about as the system has the capacity to self-correct course.

    President Tinubu and his team, given their wide political experience would likely not lead our country into such cul-de-sac because it would not even serve their best interest if by chance they wanted to be selfish.

    Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, an alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, a Commonwealth Institute scholar, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos

  • Opposition parties and fear of one-party state

    Opposition parties and fear of one-party state

    A spectral nightmare assails Nigeria’s opposition parties. They have become so befuddled by their own actions and inactions that they cannot explain where they are and where they want to go next. Their ordeal apparently arose from an inferiority complex, but they won’t admit it. They regularly conjure up the image of the polity lapsing into a one-party system. But they cannot justify their claim without indicting themselves. They depict the portrait of a ruling party that set out to ruin the opposition, but they forget that politics is like a football match. The result you get is determined by the tactics of the players and not the complaints about the rival team. The opposition parties have so far demonstrated tactlessness. They appear to prefer rancorous engagements to rational arrangements. They blame others for their immobile motions. They display an ego that emanates from the figment of hyperactive imagination; they brandish a yellow card – to the ruling party – out of sheer illusion of grandeur. Their persistent complaints have become their only weapon for blackmailing the ruling party.

    Instead of coming together to present a formidable front, opposition parties are already accusing the governing party of rigging the 2027 general election, which has not been conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    APC is expanding its coast because it is utilising the opportunities at its disposal very well. It is building on the antecedents of the legacy parties that fused in 2014 and succeeded in managing their internal cleavages. The wisdom that permitted APC chieftains to resolve to stay and survive together is grossly lacking in their rivals.

    In a heterogeneous country like Nigeria, having a one-party state can only be a product of daydreaming. But what cannot be ruled out is the dominance of one party that has done its homework accurately under a dynamic leader. Yet, this is not final. No particular party can dominate the polity forever.

    Nigeria can only officially become a one-party state if the Constitution prescribes it. That possibility is highly remote in a highly diversified nation-state where freedom of association and assembly can never be outlawed.

    Like the party in power, the opposition parties swim in an ideological vacuum, without clear, unambiguous, coherent beliefs and guiding principles. The sole motivation is floating a vehicle that can catapult their leading lights to power. The link between ideological doctrine and corresponding governance focus is lost.

    Read Also: Let’s focus on good governance, not one-party state, APC Women Leader urges Nigerians

    Since there is no unifying idea, individual opposition parties work at cross-purposes, oblivious of the fact that there is strength in unity and cohesion.

    Under the current presidential system, the 1999 Constitution (as amended) guarantees a multi-party system, which fundamentally satisfies the criteria of diversity, representation and inclusivity. The prevailing political order reflects the plural nature of Nigeria’s society and accommodates diverse ethnic, religious, and cultural groups, thereby offering platforms for varied interests.

    Currently, 18 political parties are on the register of the umpire. In September, 14 political associations that applied for registration as political parties were shortlisted for vetting.

    Five of the pre-existing 18 parties – the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Labour Party (LP), the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) – are potentially strong. The fifth party, the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), only operates in a region, the Southeast, with Anambra State as its undisputed and permanent stronghold. It should be noted that the ADC qualifies to be among the Big Five because of the Atiku Abubakar factor, although the borrowed platform is surprisingly not waxing stronger.

    In the second category are three parties – Accord (A), often used and dumped, but now adopted for next year’s governorship poll by desperate Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke; the Social Democratic Party (SDP), which is increasingly being popularised by the wealthy lawyer and businessman, Adebayo Adewole; the Young Progressive Party (YPP), which was orphaned by the exit of Senator Ifeanyi Ubah; and the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), which is always praying for adoption by aggrieved defectors from the major parties.

    Other platforms, largely considered as mushroom parties, are the Action Alliance (AA), African Action Congress (AAC), Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Boot Party (BP), National Rescue Movement (NRM), and Peoples Redemption Party (PRP). On poll days, their presidential candidates are like spectators.

    Both the ruling and opposition parties face similar challenges in varying degrees. The only difference is their diverse responses to the problems, their leadership, the place of the crisis resolution mechanism, and how they are playing their roles as political parties.

    While the ruling party is expected to monitor the government it has midwifed to ensure that it delivers on its cardinal campaign promises and never sleeps on guard, the role of the opposition is to offer constructive criticisms and provide robust checks and balances to the ruling party and the government. So far, the role of opposition in democracy has not been effectively felt.

    Also, both the ruling and opposition parties face the constraints of internal division and external pressures. But while the ruling party, being the controller of power and resources under a strong and dynamic leadership, can easily exert influence on its members, resist external pressures, insist on party supremacy, enforce discipline and whip erring members to line, members of the opposition parties, already left in the cold outside the power calculus, are easily uncontrollable, especially when their national leaderships are disputed or when they become the source of division, destabilisation and discord.

    Individually, the scattered opposition platforms are in disarray, aptly bogged down by infighting. Their inability to put their houses in order cannot be the fault of the ruling. The intra-party crisis has led to fragmentation, particularly in the main opposition party, the PDP, the LP and the NNPP, which persistently suffer from avoidable leadership tussles, factionalisation and futile reconciliation.

    The PDP spends more time in court than on the mobilisation field. Tragedy has hit the platform, decimating the fold with the exit of the Atiku camp. Even those left behind cannot close ranks. While a section wants to keep the platform as a proper opposition party, a section is actually pushing for a deal with the ruling party.

    Leadership is a bone of contention in the PDP. Only the court can interpret the lingo of its Babel. The party is polarised; neither the Wike camp or the Turaki group can accurately predict where the pendulum will swing. That is why key chieftains, including the governors, are jumping from what has become a sinking ship.

    Defections are not peculiar to the PDP. It cut across the opposition community. In their cross-carpeting desperation, the chieftains are not learning the tactics and strategies for survival, which are the legacies of the former Opposition Leader, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, who is now the President. As a party leader, he made patriotic sacrifices, deployed resources, and served as a bridge builder, manager of crisis and symbol of the organisation.

    In those 16 years of the PDP hegemony, the party had 28 governors. As people defected from the Alliance for Democracy (AD) and All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) to the PDP, those in the opposition went to the drawing board to strategise. By dint of hard work and courageous moves, they aborted the prolonged and planned permanent dominance of the polity by the PDP, which boasted that it would rule Nigeria for the next 60 years.

    Unlike Asiwaju Tinubu and his compatriots, today’s opposition figures tend to prioritise personal advancement, financial incentives, and the “lure of political relevance” over ideological alliance, sacrifice and commitment to broad goals of salvaging the country.

    Also, the opposition cannot stir meaningful debates on government policies and programmes because they cannot really approach voters with alternatives that can elicit public confidence. Their indulgence in personality attacks and a campaign of calumny, instead of showcasing their programmes, accounts for their low popularity rating. Although Nigeria is going through challenging times, the opposition cannot boldly say that the government of the day is not working hard to reposition the critical sectors through its bold socio-economic reforms.

    Neither is the opposition’s recourse to wiping emotions capable of yielding sufficient political capital. While the PDP and other smaller parties have accused the ruling party of deploying the anti-graft agencies to intimidate, witch-hunt and oppress their members so that they can defect, it is evident that the allegation is unfounded. This is because the suspects, irrespective of political leanings, are being investigated and prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

    Opposition in Nigeria is becoming a sort of window dressing. Their tactics are becoming crude, with key figures making wild appeals to ethnicity and religion. This is injurious to the cause of nation-building and harmony. After months of planning for a coalition movement, the structure has not arrived. The PDP, LP, NNPP and ADC cannot jettison their differences, despite knowing that they cannot individually compete for presidential power with the APC and triumph.

    Can Atiku make a sacrifice, like Tinubu did when he sacrificed his vice presidential ambition in 2015? Can he step down? Also, can Peter Obi dump his presidential bid and pair with Atiku as the running mate? Can there be a compromise?

    There is no chance for a one-party system in Nigeria. But there could be a dominant party at a given time. PDP is a brand and to bounce back, its leaders should return to the drawing board to re-strategise.

     The opposition has a lot to learn from the ruling party in coordinating its vision, tactics, crisis resolution, reconciliation, and leadership.

    Planning and winning an election does not start and end with ranting. It is a long race. It requires focus. It needs resources – men, money, and materials. It is like trying to build a factory. All hands must be on deck. Any political party that intends to be a long-time player in the Nigerian political system must understand the vastness and dynamics of the system. It must then deploy the right resources through the right people to get the right results, even though the results may not come immediately.

    Today’s opposition parties need to return to the classroom and learn from the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo. The Leader of Opposition in the First and Second Republics made his parties the darlings of the people. Despite the failure of the Action Group (AG) to occupy the federal seat in the First Republic, and the near success of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) to win the 1983 election, Awo’s parties etched the opposition leader’s name in the hearts of modern history.

    The achievements of the AG in the defunct Western Region have remained unparalleled. Also, the success of the UPN in the Southwest, and later Bendel and Kwara states, during the short-lived Second Republic showed how a strong opposition party should operate.

    Between 1999 and 2003, AD was in power in the six Southwest states. The governors -Tinubu (Lagos), Lam Adesina (Oyo), Olusegun Osoba (Ogun), Bisi Akande (Osun), Adebayo Adefarati (Ondo), and Niyi Adebayo (Ekiti) – did their best. When EFCC was on the trail of their counterparts in other regions, they walked freely on the streets. Also, they never defected. They were consistent. Unfortunately, the current opposition parties are not focused on rendering services to the people. Their leaders are after what to pocket and live like emperors at the expense of the masses. This is why the federal seat is their main target.

    None of the current opposition parties can point at any programme that matches, much less surpasses, any Federal Government’s programmes. The UPN’s Four Cardinal Programmes remain unique till today. Why can’t the opposition parties adopt at least two of them in their states?   

    It is not too late for the opposition parties to redirect their steps.

    The general election is about a year away. A serious opposition party that is not out for the filthy lucre would utilise the months ahead to enunciate several programmes to uplift the people. Making noise about the ruling party will not stir the electorate to vote against a government that has done far better than all the other governments in the last 26 years. The cacophony about an imminent one-party state cannot sway the electorate. Only a performing opposition can make the voters change their minds.  

  • Wolf cry over one-party state

    Wolf cry over one-party state

    For 16 years, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was on the saddle of leadership in the country. This was between 1999 and 2015. At the height of its power, it became full of itself and overconfident. It believed that there was nothing it could not do; that all it needed to do was to say it out and the deed was done. It was a big mistake. It boasted that it would rule for 60 years. I am not sure that the party still remembers that now because of where fate has thrust it in the power loop.

    It has painfully come to realise that power does not flow from the thoughts and machinations of man alone; that when your chi, apologies to the Igbo, cracks your palm kernel, you should eat it in silence, say a prayer or two and not taunt others. PDP woes began in 2008 long before its fall from power in 2015. Little did it know that it was setting the stage for its eclipse when its former chairman, Vincent Ogbulafor, boasted that it would rule Nigeria for 60 years.

    “PDP is a party for all and it is set to rule Nigeria for the next 60 years. I don’t care if Nigeria becomes a one-party state. We can do it and PDP can contain all”. As far back as 2008 when Nigeria’s democracy was just nine years, PDP was already thinking of making it a one-party state. Today, seeing its evil plan collapse before its eyes, it is accusing President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) which wrested power from it in 2015 of having such plans.

    Just as politicians both elected and appointed dumped their parties for PDP in its days of glory, so are they leaving PDP in droves today for APC. It is in the nature of politicians to go foraging in places where their bread will be buttered. Politicians do not like to be in the losing party and PDP, for now is not a winning party. It is in a serious crisis which may affect its chances in the 2027 polls for which some of its leading lights chaperoned by its presidential candidate in 2023, Atiku Abubakar, have been trying to form a coalition.

    Their coalition is an extension of their fight with Tinubu and if APC suffers collateral damage in the process, all well and good. The coalition arrowheads, Atiku and Nasir El-Rufai, are not the best of friends but when it comes to Tinubu, they are ready to close ranks and do anything to get him out of office. In their haste to achieve their goal and apparently blinded by political animosity, they, particularly Atiku, left their flanks open.

    The cracks in Atiku’s PDP are widening by the day. He ran as the party’s presidential candidate with then Delta State Governor Ifeanyi Okowa as his running mate. Two years down the line, both men have gone their separate ways. Okowa’s defection along with his successor, Sheriff Oborevwori, and the entire PDP structure in Delta hit Atiku like a bolt out of the blue. He never saw it coming and he has yet to recover from the political Tsunami which hit PDP in that state.

    It was one defection like no other. If a state would flip, it was not expected to be Delta, a state hitherto considered as the party’s exclusive preserve. Until the April 23 defection, PDP was Delta and Delta was PDP. No other party than PDP had ruled the state since 1999. ‘How did it happen right under our nose’? This is the question sources say they have been asking themselves in the last few days. But, they may not have seen nothing yet, according to these sources. Asked what they meant, they replied: “more defections are in the offing”.

    Read Also:Sylva saved Bayelsa from one-party state – Yakiah

    Many members are said to be unhappy and asking questions of Atiku whose running mate led others to APC eight days ago. They want the former vice president to explain how Okowa defected without his knowledge. As usual, rather than frontally address the internal crisis which caused the defection, Atiku and his ilk are blaming Tinubu for PDP’s misfortune. They claim that the defection is part of the President’s grand plan to turn Nigeria into a one-party state. Really?

    Can PDP of all parties accuse anyone of working towards a one-party state, the same arrangement that it planned to foist on the country when it boasted that it would rule for 60 years and nothing will happen if Nigeria became a one-party state under its watch? Check: “PDP is set to rule for 60 years. I don’t care if Nigeria becomes a one-party state”. What other proof of a proponent of a one-party state do you need more than that?

    Politics is all about interests and how such interests are protected. As Okowa said when he, Oborevwori and others were ushered into APC on Monday, it was in the defectors’ interests to move into the ruling party in order to ‘connect to Abuja’. Come to think of it, what is bad in it if Tinubu worked underground or through people to make this big catch for APC? When PDP was ‘capturing all the capturables’, as K.O Mbadiwe would say, in its days in power did it not see it all as fair and foul in war?

    Their claim that the nation is descending into a one-party state is what it is – crying wolf where there is none. With over 18 registered political parties in the country, only the serious and the best can attract quality members who will drive their dreams, aspirations and programmes for the people. It is obvious that APC is now the domineering party just as PDP was some years ago. That PDP has lost out in the power game does not make  Tinubu and APC, that are now in the driver’s seat, monsters and harbingers of a one-party state.

    Even with all the 28 out of the 36 governors in the country that PDP had in 2008, Nigeria did not become a one-party state. How then can APC with a lesser number of governors now, 22, be accused of plotting a one-party state? The Delta defections have done as much damage to Atiku’s coalition plans just as the party’s governors’ rejection of same. His talk of a one-party state does not hold water.