In every democracy, political parties survive not merely by winning elections but because members believe they have a stake in the process. When that belief fades, cracks emerge quietly: defections multiply, loyalty weakens, anti-party activities thrive, and the structure collapses from within. This danger now confronts the ruling All Progressives Congress across several states where governors have turned candidate emergence into a private succession arrangement rather than a democratic contest.
From Kwara to Ogun, Ondo, Cross River, Gombe, Rivers, Lagos, and beyond, the growing culture of forced consensus and political imposition creates deep resentment among party stakeholders who believe the APC is abandoning internal democracy for executive convenience. Recent reports indicate widening tensions as aspirants resist governors' preferred candidates and consensus arrangements.
The Irony of APC's Evolution
The irony is striking. The APC once built its national appeal around opposition politics, inclusion, and resistance against authoritarian structures. Today, many party faithful fear the same tendencies the party once condemned are becoming institutionalised within its own ranks.
In Ogun, consensus arrangements backed by powerful interests have sparked debates about whether aspirants stand a fair chance against governor-backed contenders. In Lagos, the perception that political outcomes are predetermined fuels quiet frustration among younger politicians and grassroots mobilisers.
Kwara: A Clear Example
Perhaps one of the clearest examples of the APC's contradiction unfolds in Kwara. Senator Saliu Mustapha denied participating in the APC Kwara Central senatorial primary, reaffirming his ambition to contest the 2027 governorship election. His case reflects the dilemma ambitious politicians face within the ruling party.
Senator Mustapha was reportedly trusted enough to be positioned as a replacement in the senatorial hierarchy, yet when he pursued a legitimate governorship ambition, political resistance emerged. This contradiction exposes a deeper problem: loyalty is often rewarded only when it aligns perfectly with entrenched power blocs.
The Unseen Electoral Threat
The growing imposition culture may become the APC's biggest unseen electoral threat. History shows that politicians denied fair participation rarely remain passive. Some defect quietly; others sabotage candidates from within. Governors may win the primary battle but lose the general election because wounded stakeholders withdraw their structures, resources, and enthusiasm.
Concerns mount that the APC's aggressive pursuit of consensus could trigger rebellion in several states. Party insiders warn that exclusion and forced arrangements may lead to defections and anti-party activities. The danger is not always immediate. Political implosions often begin subtly: a ward leader becomes indifferent, a senator funds parallel loyalists, a local structure works against the party ticket, youth mobilisers lose enthusiasm, and party financiers begin secret negotiations elsewhere.
Before long, a supposedly safe state produces a shocking electoral upset. That possibility should worry the APC deeply ahead of future elections.
The Cost of Imposition
The belief that governors alone should determine successors may provide temporary order but weakens long-term party cohesion. Democracy cannot thrive where competition is replaced with coronation. Genuine consensus is negotiated; forced consensus is merely imposition wearing democratic clothing.
Even more dangerous is the message to younger politicians and ordinary party members: that ambition, popularity, and hard work matter less than political endorsement from above. No political party, regardless of its dominance, is immune from implosion when internal grievances are ignored for too long.
Ironically, many defections currently strengthening the APC are products of internal injustice and exclusion in rival parties. If the APC fails to learn from the mistakes that weakened others, the ruling party may face the same fate—not because the opposition became strong, but because internal dissatisfaction became impossible to suppress.
The warning signs are already there. In politics, ignored warnings often become future headlines.
