Will Tinubu Be Sole Candidate In 2027 Poll?

By Ifeanyi Chukwu Afuba

At the end of its second plenary summit this year, the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria expressed concern at the continued weakening of the opposition in the current political dispensation.

In a communique issued September 19, 2025, signed by his lordships Lucius Ugorji and Donatus Ogun, president and secretary, respectively, the bishops cautioned against a turn to a party state.

‘There seems to be suppression of opposition as Nigeria appears to be tilting to a one-party state, the development of which is not a good omen for democracy,’ the release read in part. Interventions of the Church on the state of the nation are often in general, reflective terms, filled with Biblical exhortation. It’s indicative of the seriousness of the matter when such statements are subject-specific and the defect is emphasised with a prophetic ring, as in the instant.

The shrinking of democratic space in the past three years is disturbing and shows no sign of abating yet. If anything, the chances of a constricted race in which President Bola Tinubu contests against no notable presidential candidate are growing by the day.

The opposition remains a fundamental component of democracy, serving as a bridge between the government in power and the electorate. As emphasised in the maxim that absolute power corrupts absolutely, opposition ranks form a protective belt in democratic practice. Active opposition serves to hold government accountable and promote transparency in administration. It bears stating that the opposition is necessary for the sustainability of the system. The opposition should point out the lapses of an incumbent administration and, indeed, question certain decisions and policies. More insights and better perspectives tend to be gained from such exchanges. By generating alternative solutions to problem areas, opposition parties broaden participation in the political process. Good governance is enabled by the opposition’s watchdog role. An active opposition further offers a choice of alternative government to the voter. A thriving opposition is not merely an important part of democracy; it’s essential in strengthening and enriching democratic governance.

Whither then the present democratic dispensation with opposition participation in the 2027 election looking so unviable? None among the potential contenders in 2027 has the experience of Atiku Abubakar. When Atiku debuted in the presidential arena in 1993, Bola Ahmed Tinubu was operating at the senatorial level. Since 1999, Akitu has been juggling the reins of the presidential office, standing as a candidate from 2007.

The veteran presidential candidate, however, is unsure of a platform to contest the 2027 poll because his latest political tent, the African Democratic Congress, is embattled. It’s no ordinary or accidental logjam. The ADC is locked in a curious leadership dispute. If a rival faction led by Ibe Kachikwu, laying claims to the leadership, succeeds, Atiku knows that will be the end of his aspiration. Peter Obi, the candidate of regional and generational anger in the 2023 poll, is caught in a similar bind. Obi is yet to find a secure party where he will run for the next presidential election. His last party, the Labour Party, is also under siege. On Tuesday, October 14, 2025, Mr Julius Abure was suddenly acknowledged as the national chairman of Labour Party at INEC’s quarterly interactive meeting with political parties. If Abure’s predictable recognition by INEC persists, Mr Obi knows he cannot emerge as the Labour Party candidate anymore. Former President Goodluck Jonathan, who is believed to be preparing for a second tenure at the presidency, faces a similarly uphill task. His party, the PDP, had long been a target of destabilisation plots. The Abuja super minister’s agents in PDP, who have so far done a good job of undermining the PDP from within, now face the titanic battle – denying Jonathan a stable and cohesive PDP on which to vie.

Expectedly, the Presidency rejects allegations of subverting opposition parties. In two comments in quick succession, Special Adviser to the President on Information & Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, dismissed perceptions of the government’s efforts at derailing major opposition parties.
In a release, April 28, 2025, Onanuga stated that ‘no policy, official action or directive from the presidency seeks to “dismantle democracy” or “weaken opposition or create a one-party state.” Returning the blame, the disclaimer submitted: ‘The opposition cannot blame President Tinubu and the governing APC for their poor organisation, indiscipline, and gross incompetence in managing their affairs. It is certainly not part of President Tinubu’s job to organise or strengthen opposition parties.” Onanuga was also on hand to aver that the Presidency was not involved in the opposition crisis when ADC’s relaunch met with difficulties in July this year.

While freedom of speech may not be under threat, the mainstay of opposition relevance, freedom of political association, has become problematic. Today, the environment necessary for the opposition to flourish hardly exists. The government has a responsibility in this regard.

Leadership succession is a major issue for Nigeria, as it is for many other countries. It should be obvious that the management of transition processes impact on the stability of the polity. Our experience harps on the need for a credible electoral process, inclusive frameworks, plural political choices and participatory decision-making. Alienation of the opposition has often come with serious consequences. Regime authorities, by their agenda and priorities, have the choice either of aggravating or ameliorating the challenges of democratic succession. Military termination of the Second Republic was facilitated by the political rift arising from the conduct of the 1983 election. A bitterly disputed general election left in it’s wake a tense polity, which softened the ground for ambitious soldiers. A different form of opposition suppression affected General Ibrahim Babangida’s transition programme to the Third Republic.

A sweeping, generational ban on experienced politicians from participating in the transition cast the exercise in suspicion of a hidden agenda. The restrictive nature of the programme seemed designed to get rid of opposition to self-succession by the political elite. General Sani Abacha similarly began a transition process with an exclusion agenda. The junta succeeded in staving off prospective presidential aspirants with the punitive failed banks and failed contract decrees. Mercifully, divine intervention stopped the tearing of an already broken country. Much of the power game in the Fourth Republic has seen the ruling parties using instruments of authority to put the opposition at a disadvantage. Perceptions of selective use of such bodies as the EFCC to ensure political compliance are rife. The ruling party has, on occasions, been seen to have sponsored the impeachment of opposition and independent-minded governors. In the immediate past administration, executive excesses left a climate of intimidation hovering over the judiciary. What is the worth of democratic rights without a free judiciary?

It’s therefore very important that the opposition has the room to operate and effectively play its complementary role. Beyond Onanuga’s protestations, the government’s weakening of opposition parties need not be by direct means. The PDP’s loss of four governors to the APC in 2025 alone is unprecedented. In just a space of four months, Akwa Ibom’s Umo Eno, Enugu State’s Peter Mbah, and Bayelsa State’s Duoye Diri publicly defected to the APC. The fourth, Rivers State’s Simnalaya Fubara, is considered to have joined the ruling party quietly for tactical reasons. The illegality of Fubara’s suspension as Governor was clear enough. No one among the defenders of the ridiculous action has cited the constitutional provision defining a state of emergency as a power to abort constitutional order. Only a state House of Assembly and a court with requisite jurisdiction may intervene on the mandate of an elected Governor. The bullying represented by Fubara’s experience can serve as an indirect message to the opposition. You either play ball or get beaten.

Many Nigerians are still struggling to understand how the Supreme Court, in all of five months, was unable to hear the PDP Governors’ suit challenging the constitutionality of Rivers State emergency rule. Where lies the confidence that litigations on party leadership tussles will be justly addressed? How can opposition parties stand strong, free from the ruling party’s underhanded tactics?

And while the ruling party finds the defections into its fold fair and square, she says nothing about the illegitimately inherited mandates therefrom. Electoral mandates belong to political parties whose logos appear on the ballot papers. What right do defecting politicians have to transfer the mandate from their originating parties to another party? Defections rob the electorate of their authority, their values, and their self-esteem. Rewarded mandates from defection transactions are a potential source of instability.

A scenario in which major opposition parties and candidates are not on the ballot in 2027 is not far-fetched. That would be an unprecedented, costly development. A situation in which opposition parties are adopting the incumbent as their candidate amidst protests from their members would be unhealthy and counterproductive in the long run.

With no provision for independent candidates, no lawful efforts should be spared to ensure that parties give expression to the yearnings of their membership, as well as the mood of society.