The convergence of opposition politicians at Government House, Agodi, Ibadan, for a summit last Saturday—aimed at selecting a consensus presidential candidate to be fielded against President Bola Tinubu in the 2027 elections—signals a renewed effort to dislodge the All Progressives Congress (APC), which has governed Nigeria since May 29, 2015.
Incidentally, a majority of the political leaders who recently converged at the Ibadan summit are the same individuals who had earlier walked out of a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) leadership meeting at the National Convention Centre into the Musa Yar’Adua Centre in Abuja in 2013 to declare the establishment of factional PDP after which it joined other opposition figures in forming the current ruling APC—a merger of the ACN, CPC, and factions of the ANPP and PDP.
Notably, the APC merger took place in 2013, two years before the 2015 elections. Similarly, the current proposal involves consolidating the presidential ambitions of multiple political actors into a single candidate to challenge the incumbent, President Tinubu. However, this is happening barely one year to the date of the election.
During the two-year period leading up to the 2015 election, the new party,APC in my estimation, underwent a process of formation, turbulence, reorganization, and eventual stabilization which is tune with Bruce Tuckman’s rule for group formation. Some of us in the commentariat had predicted that, as a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) established primarily to defeat President Goodluck Jonathan and the then-ruling PDP, the APC would disintegrate sooner rather than later. This assumption was based on the fact that the APC was formed from parties with strong regional agendas, reflecting Nigeria’s diverse ethnic composition and often conflicting political interests.
However, contrary to those expectations, the APC has remained in power at Aso Rock Villa since May 29, 2015. That is more than a decade—indeed, just one month short of eleven years.
Hopefully, the declared intention by opposition leaders in Ibadan—what may be termed the “Ibadan Declaration”—to forge a common front will put to rest concerns that the APC and President Tinubu are seeking to turn Nigeria into a one-party state. Some observers have dismissed such claims as exaggerated, noting that although 32 of Nigeria’s 36 state governors have voluntarily defected to the ruling APC, leaving only four outside its fold, there was still room for the opposition to thrive if it is creative and innovative.
From that point of view, one could argue that the mass movement into APC reflects a weak and reactive opposition. It suggests that many opposition parties lack robust internal think tanks or the foresight to engage external strategic support. Had they done so, they might have developed the type of countermeasure—fielding a single consensus candidate—much earlier, rather than only recently proposing it at the April 25 Ibadan summit, which is a sort of 11th hour decision.
The key difference between the current strategy—where 14 opposition parties are seeking to align—and the 2013 APC merger is that the latter involved the formal unification of political parties into one platform. In contrast, the present effort represents a coalition of political interests rather than a merger of structures, with the shared objective of unseating the APC and President Tinubu from Aso Rock Villa.
Thus, while it took the merger of the ACN, CPC, ANPP, and a faction of the PDP to defeat the PDP and President Goodluck Jonathan in 2015, the opposition now hopes to achieve a similar outcome without dissolving their parties. Instead, they aim to consolidate the ambitions of leading opposition figures into a single candidacy—one they believe will be strong enough to challenge Tinubu and deny him a second term.
The idea may appear novel, but upon closer scrutiny, it becomes evident that the concept is already at play in the current political dispensation.
Here is why.
Of the 36 state governors, only four have not aligned with the APC. Of these four, two are from the PDP, one is from APGA, and the other is from the Labor Party.
Notably, the Labor Party governor of Abia State and the APGA governor of Anambra State, even before the Ibadan Declaration of April 25, had indicated that their parties would not field presidential candidates in the 2027 elections. Instead, they declared their intention to subsume any presidential ambitions within their parties and mobilize support for President Bola Tinubu’s re-election.
Is this not similar to the strategy the conveners of the Ibadan summit are attempting to replicate? President Tinubu has demonstrated a notable ability to convert rivals into allies, as evidenced during the 2023 APC presidential primaries, where about eight (8) aspirants stepped down and endorsed him, enabling him to emerge as the party’s candidate. In this light, the alignment of APGA and the Labor Party with Tinubu ahead of the 2027 elections appears deliberate rather than coincidental.
In view of these developments, one may reasonably ask whether Tinubu and the ruling APC are once again ahead of an opposition that is only just emerging from a period of inertia, despite its recent posturing through the Ibadan Declaration.
Interestingly, one of the two remaining PDP governors—once a leading figure in the opposition—reportedly attempted to defect to the APC but was unsuccessful. He was rebuffed at the state level, as local party leaders believed they possessed sufficient strength to win without his defection. The conditions offered to him were politically untenable, leaving him unable to accept without sacrificing his dignity.
A similar scenario unfolded in Osun State, where a sitting governor seeking to defect to the APC was also rejected. With limited options, he was compelled to align with the relatively weaker Accord Party.
Historically, opposition parties tend to unite against a dominant ruling party perceived as a common adversary. However, the current developments—where the ruling party appears selective in accepting defectors and opposition parties struggle to maintain cohesion—are indeed extraordinary.
As earlier noted, Nigeria’s political history—particularly the formation of the APC in 2013—demonstrates how opposition parties once successfully united against the ruling PDP. Driven by the principle that unity strengthens political success, they collectively mounted a formidable challenge and eventually become the ruling party.
This was achieved despite countermeasures by the PDP, which reportedly deployed anti-corruption agencies such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) to investigate and prosecute opposition governors and their cabinet members, in what was widely perceived as an attempt to weaken them.
Today, however, that strategy appears largely obsolete. The current generation of governors seems more adept at navigating the complexities of governance and public finance, avoiding the kinds of infractions—particularly the misuse of local government and ecological funds—that previously led to investigations, prosecutions, and convictions.
As a result, attempts by opposition figures to blame the EFCC for their weakness have failed to convince many Nigerians. Observers have instead pointed to poor internal organization, weak or nonexistent crisis management structures, and a lack of strategic direction within opposition parties.
Rather than addressing these internal shortcomings—especially the entrenched egos and competing ambitions among their leaders, particularly within the ADC—opposition figures, they have focused on accusing the ruling APC of attempting to turn Nigeria into a one-party state. However, this argument has not been widely accepted by discerning and non-partisan Nigerians, who view it as insufficient to excuse the opposition’s failure to hold the government accountable effectively.
A useful comparison can be drawn with the United States, where Nigeria adopted its presidential system of government. Following the defeat of Kamala Harris by Donald Trump in the last election, leaders of the Democratic Party have come under pressure from their supporters to become more assertive and effective. In response, the party has shown renewed vigor, recording victories in key elections around the state of Virginia as it prepares for the midterm contests, with the aim of regaining control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
By the same token, it is reasonable to expect similar pressure to mount on opposition leaders in Nigeria who are increasingly appearing not to be a match for the ruling APC.
Remarkably, all the seismic changes outlined above have occurred within Nigeria’s political ecosystem, and some are unprecedented in the annals of the country’s political evolution. As evidenced by the scenarios described above, these developments have taken place in less than 36 months of President Tinubu holding sway at Aso Rock Villa.
Although the renewed vigor being exhibited by the opposition has energized the political atmosphere, there are already visible flaws in the ability of the proposed alliance of political heavyweights to present a single presidential candidate capable of challenging Tinubu. Nevertheless, this development is a positive step toward making Nigeria’s political contestation space more dynamic than the rather tepid performance witnessed since the APC transitioned from opposition to ruling party in 2015.
Prior to the Ibadan summit of opposition politicians on Saturday, April 25, I engaged in a WhatsApp exchange with a friend and fellow columnist, who alleged that the ruling party was not “allowing” opposition parties to thrive. I disagreed, arguing:
“The opposition is lazy and complacent. Power is neither given nor conceded; it must be struggled for and, inevitably, fought for. If the opposition during Tinubu’s rise had been as passive as the current leadership, the PDP might still be the ruling party today. Instead, through grit and determination, a coalition of opposition forces formed in 2013 defeated the PDP in 2015—despite the bold claim by its then chairman, Chief Vincent Ogbulafor, that the party would rule Nigeria for sixty years. In reality, it governed for only sixteen.”
Continuing, I reminded my friend:
“As may be recalled, the APC itself faced internal challenges when elements within the CPC, following the end of President Buhari’s tenure, sought to break away through the machinations of some aggrieved former governors and key cabinet members of the immediate past administration. However, this potential internal insurrection—if you will – a rebellion—was swiftly managed before it could escalate into a full-blown crisis. That is a mark of leadership intrinsic to the APC, which many other political parties appear to lack.
It is also significant that many of the same political actors now organizing a summit to forge a common front against Tinubu and the APC were present when the PDP collapsed under their watch. Having now pivoted to another platform, the ADC, they are once again congregating in Ibadan to plan the removal of a ruling party—this time without merging their parties, as was the case during the formation of the APC.
In my view, since lightning rarely strikes the same place twice, Tinubu—who was at the forefront of the 2013 coalition that ousted the PDP—is now leading the very system his former allies seek to dismantle. They aim to replicate the events of 2013–2015, which resulted in a historic transfer of power and the defeat of Goodluck Jonathan and the PDP at the polls.”
Overall, instead of addressing their internal crises, opposition leaders have continued to point fingers at the ruling APC. It is troubling that, under their watch, the new platform already appears to be heading toward disarray, given the rigid positions some leaders have taken by vowing not to step down for one another. Worse still, their supporters—some of whom are overly zealous—are already composing songs and celebrating these uncompromising stances.
Why, then, are they blaming President Tinubu and the APC for Nigeria’s alleged drift toward a one-party state? Must we not also recall that during President Obasanjo’s second term (2003–2007), the PDP had ambitions to take control of all the Southwest states? Was it not only Lagos State, under Tinubu’s leadership as governor, that narrowly resisted that effort?
Why is the opposition wringing its hands and lamenting a supposed descent into a one-party state, instead of creatively pushing back by building the kind of vibrant opposition it is only now attempting to form through the April 25 Ibadan Declaration—arguably at the eleventh hour?
Where in the world does a political party assist its rival to survive? What is the essence of rivalry if not to outmaneuver and outsmart one’s opponent? Is it not a common sentiment that one’s adversary remains preoccupied with internal challenges, thereby lacking the capacity to mount a serious threat?
In that context, statements attributed to President Tinubu and his Chief of Staff, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, expressing the view that the ADC may continue to face internal difficulties, can be seen as part of the rough and tumble of politics. There is little unusual about such remarks.
In political practice, tactics such as strategic messaging—and even aggressive opposition research—are often deployed to unsettle rivals. Similar dynamics exist in the private sector, where banks and telecommunications firms compete intensely, deploying various strategies to outmaneuver one another, even as unethical practices are generally condemned. At a broader level, competing nations and global corporations also engage in intelligence gathering-espionage to gain advantage.
Given this reality, the ADC would be better served by focusing less on allegations and conspiracy narratives and more on developing strategies to effectively challenge the APC and President Tinubu.
It is, however, encouraging that the ADC—alongside other prominent political actors—appears to have awakened from its slumber, as evidenced by its assertive posture at the Ibadan gathering last Saturday. Hopefully, the momentum generated by that summit will crystallize into a genuine consensus. Otherwise, what is currently being portrayed as a lion’s roar may ultimately prove to be little more than a kitten’s mew.
It would also be remiss not to highlight certain inconsistencies. When the ADC expelled figures such as Nafiu Bala Gombe and Abejide—who were perceived as disruptive—those decisions were enforced. Why, then, has the PDP leadership, now prominent within the ADC coalition, been unable to take similar decisive action against former Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike, now Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, whose actions are widely seen as having significantly weakened the PDP? Was it the APC or President Tinubu that prevented such action of sanctioning Wike or caused him to become a renegade when the party he helped nuture betrayed him after it was hijacked?
What the ADC requires, in my view, is a robust strategic think tank capable of matching the political acumen associated with Tinubu’s camp. Without such capacity, its chances of capturing the presidency—perhaps not even until 2031—remain uncertain.
Even proposed alliances, such as a ticket involving Peter Obi and Musa Kwankwaso, tagged Ok by their supporters, may struggle to overcome the APC in its current dominant position. While such a combination might have been more viable in earlier election cycles, the political landscape ahead of 2027 is markedly different. The ruling party currently controls 32 of Nigeria’s 36 states, and even in states governed by APGA and the Labor Party, there have been open endorsements of President Tinubu’s re-election by incumbents such as Dr. Alex Otti of Abia and Prof. Chukwuma Soludo of Anambra.
I would like to conclude by recalling a piece of advice shared by a colleague, attributed to Rabi Morshe Rothstein:
“A good lawyer knows the law; a great lawyer knows the judge.
This is the difference between playing the game and understanding how it is actually played.
Success is not merely about being the smartest person in the room but about knowing the right people. Rules are written, interpreted, and sometimes bent by people.
Knowledge may open the door, but relationships often determine the outcome.”
This insight underscores a broader reality: politics, like many fields, is shaped as much by relationships and strategic positioning as by formal rules.
As I observed in an earlier piece, this column titled, “Elections 2027: While ADC is Playing Checkers,APC Is Playing Chess” opposition’s current efforts resemble a late-stage maneuver.
While the Ibadan Declaration is commendable in intent, it may be coming too close to the 2027 elections to allow for the full maturation of a viable coalition.
According to Bruce Tuckman’s model of group development, organizations typically evolve through four stages: forming, storming, norming, and performing. Some variations include a fifth stage—stabilizing—but the core progression remains the same.
At the forming stage, individuals come together, roles are unclear, and dependence on leadership is high. This is followed by the storming phase, characterized by conflict and competition for influence. Next comes the norming stage, where cohesion develops, roles become clearer, and collaboration improves. Finally, the performing stage is reached, where the group operates effectively toward shared goals.
The APC, formed in 2013 through the merger of several parties, has had sufficient time to progress through these stages. By contrast, the opposition coalition, having only recently entered the forming stage as of April 25, is racing against time.
Skepticism about its prospects is reinforced by past experiences. For instance, earlier attempts by opposition groups—including the Alliance for Democracy (AD) and others—to form a coalition around candidates such as Fola Adeola and his running mate Nuhu Ribadu ended in failure, largely due to inadequate cohesion and failure to navigate the stages of group development effectively.
It is likely that lessons from such experiences informed the eventual formation of the APC, which today continues to expand rapidly—much like wildfire during the harmattan season.
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
Stay ahead with the latest updates! Join The ConclaveNG on WhatsApp and Telegram for real-time news alerts, breaking stories, and exclusive content delivered straight to your phone. Don’t miss a headline — subscribe now!
