The recent announcement of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the sole presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) for the 2027 general elections has ignited widespread alarm among democratic stakeholders. This hasty move—publicly declared at an APC summit—brazenly contravenes multiple provisions of the 2022 Electoral Act and endangers the already fragile foundations of Nigeria’s democratic experiment.

The adoption, which bypasses legal procedures outlined for the selection of consensus candidates, signals a troubling authoritarian drift and raises urgent questions about the future of electoral competition, party democracy, and the rule of law in Nigeria.

Clear Legal Breach

Section 84(9) of the Electoral Act 2022 could not be more explicit: “A political party that adopts a consensus candidate shall secure the written consent of all cleared aspirants for the position, indicating their voluntary withdrawal from the race and their endorsement of the consensus candidate.”

In addition, Section 84(11) stipulates that “A special convention or nomination congress shall be held to ratify the choice of consensus candidates at designated centres.” These provisions exist to ensure that all internal party procedures remain fair, transparent, and compliant with democratic norms.

By endorsing Tinubu as the party’s standard-bearer without conducting a nomination convention or obtaining the required consents from cleared aspirants—at least two years before the electoral timetable is released by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)—the APC has unambiguously flouted the law. This not only constitutes a legal violation but also a moral affront to the principles of political pluralism and competitive electoral processes.

Undemocratic Precedent

In mature democracies, the process of candidate selection is guided by well-established norms that prioritize transparency and participation. In the United States, for example, political parties hold extensive primaries and caucuses in all states, allowing millions of party members to vote on who their nominee should be. This ensures that no single figure is imposed from above and that the legitimacy of the candidate is reinforced through the collective will of the party base.

Nigeria’s APC, however, appears to be taking a different route—one that eschews internal contestation for the consolidation of elite consensus. This act of unilateralism—elevating President Tinubu without competition or consultation—undermines the foundational idea that elections should be decided by voters and party delegates, not imposed by powerful cabals or predetermined outcomes.

Weakening the Opposition

Even more worrying is the political environment in which this premature adoption has occurred. Nigeria’s opposition parties continue to hemorrhage members to the ruling APC in what is widely perceived as defections for personal gain or protection. These defections weaken the opposition’s ability to hold the government accountable, thus eroding one of democracy’s key pillars: a viable and vibrant opposition.

Some political observers believe that this strategy is part of a broader scheme to transform Nigeria into a de facto one-party state. The increasing absorption of political figures from rival parties into the APC mirrors the unhealthy dominance once attempted by the defunct National Party of Nigeria during the Second Republic or the attempted life presidency of General Sani Abacha in the 1990s.

The experience of other African countries provides grim warnings. In Tanzania, for instance, the opposition was systematically neutered ahead of the 2024 elections when CHADEMA, the main rival party, was barred from participating under dubious pretexts. Nigeria appears to be tiptoeing down a similar authoritarian path.

The Danger of Political Apathy

The direct consequence of these manipulations is the steady erosion of public trust in the electoral system. The numbers are damning: voter turnout has plummeted from 57.54% in 2007 to 26.72% in 2023, the lowest since the return to civilian rule in 1999. Such figures reflect the electorate’s growing belief that their votes no longer matter and that the outcomes are already prearranged by political elites.

This decline is not just statistical—it is existential. When citizens no longer believe in the power of the ballot, they disengage from governance, creating fertile ground for authoritarianism and further decay of democratic institutions.

Electoral Compromise and Systemic Rot

Even beyond the party politics, Nigeria’s entire electoral system is teetering under the weight of systemic corruption and incompetence. In the 2024/25 WASSCE, for example, examination malpractice and organisational chaos undermined the credibility of an institution once regarded as a beacon of merit.

In elections, issues such as vote-buying, voter suppression, and compromised electoral officials continue to mar the credibility of polls. The 2012 Ondo governorship election marked a watershed moment when open vote-trading became commonplace. That culture of transactional democracy has only deepened since.

Today, votes are traded like commodities, and political parties win elections not based on competence or performance, but on their capacity to deploy cash and coercion. The premature endorsement of candidates by fiat merely adds to this disturbing trend, reinforcing the perception that power in Nigeria is neither earned nor contested but allocated.

Time for Institutional Reforms

The urgent need for electoral and political reforms cannot be overstated. Among the necessary interventions are:

• Amending the Electoral Act to penalize premature and illegal endorsements.

• Mandating INEC oversight of all internal party processes involving consensus candidates.

• Empowering internal party democracy, including fair primaries, regular party congresses, and member-led decision-making.

• Establishing independent political ombudsmen to receive complaints about candidate selections and intra-party violations.

These reforms must be championed not just by politicians, but by civil society organisations, the media, and ordinary citizens, all of whom have a stake in protecting Nigeria’s democracy.

Lessons from History

Nigeria’s past offers sobering reminders of the consequences of unchecked power. The failed attempt by Sani Abacha to engineer a life presidency through the adoption of himself by five political parties illustrates how dangerously self-serving ambition can subvert democracy. Nigeria ultimately survived that dark chapter—but at great cost.

If the ruling elite continue to manipulate the political space to serve narrow ambitions, the resulting instability may plunge the nation into yet another cycle of conflict and regression. The cost of such political hubris is far too high for a country already burdened with insecurity, economic hardship, and institutional decay.

A Call to Action

Ultimately, democracy thrives only when there is genuine competition, respect for rules, and open participation. By prematurely crowning President Tinubu the APC’s sole candidate for 2027, party leaders are not just violating legal statutes—they are robbing Nigerians of the right to choose and undermining the democratic process.

Now more than ever, Nigerians must remain vigilant. Citizens, activists, journalists, and opposition parties must continue to challenge illegalities and resist the creeping authoritarianism that threatens to hijack the 2027 elections.

Democracy is not self-sustaining. It demands constant nurturing, vigilance, and the collective will to say no to political manipulation—before it becomes the norm rather than the exception.