The dust may not have fully settled on the conventions of what is gradually emerging as the three main political parties in the country, the All Progressives Congress, African Democratic Congress and Peoples Democratic Party, gearing up for the fast-approaching 2027 elections.
Yet, somehow, the unfolding fallouts of those conventions remind me of that famous opening line of Charles Dickens’ ‘A Tale of Two Cities’: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”
The ADC and PDP, the main opposition parties in the land, are still writhing in a self-inflicted and debilitating factional crisis over which the Supreme Court has already reserved judgment. The apex court is expected to inform counsel for the various parties in the many cases before it when it will deliver its verdicts.
A retrospective look at the recent conventions of the three parties offers a window into their adherence to the rule of law, constitutional and democratic principles, and a peek into what may likely play out in the run-up to 2027 and beyond. The All Progressives Congress convention was held on March 27-28 with glorious success at Eagle Square, Abuja. All the members of the APC National Working Committee, barring one or two, were re-elected at the convention by consensus and affirmation without much fuss.
The conventions of the Peoples Democratic Party and the African Democratic Alliance further widened fissures within the two parties and entrenched members deeper in their respective factions.
The PDP convention was held by a faction of the party led by the Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike, which has taken the upper hand in court. In other words, the court backed the PDP convention.
But that of the ADC was conducted in flagrant disregard of court orders and the seeming position of the Independent National Electoral Commission.
While INEC monitored the first two conventions, those of the APC and PDP factions, it stayed away from the April 14 convention of the ADC for the same reason: it was not in tandem with the court orders.
The matter of how the ADC faction led by General David Mark (rtd) and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola ended in an events centre, Rainbow Events Centre, for its convention is still a subject of controversy: controversy regarding its conduct by a faction declared illegal by the Nafiu Gombe/Leke Abejide faction; and controversy over whether what the party organised could actually pass for a convention in the real sense of it.
It would appear the ADC leaders merely indulged their fantasies, providing themselves another platform to pour invectives and diatribes on President Bola Tinubu and the governing APC.
Now, what do these conventions signal for democracy and the rule of law? Essentially, conventions are party activities meant to deepen and enrich the political and democratic process, with party delegates or members coming together to consider and pass resolutions, or to elect or re-elect officers, in a bid to take their parties to the next level.
I had the privilege of serving as a member of the Media and Publicity Sub-Committee at the recent APC convention. That afforded me ample opportunity to have a front-row view of the elaborate work that went into planning and executing the congress by the various committees constituted for the convention, which apparently accounted for its success.
Eagle Square was a beehive of activity in the days leading up to the congress. And on D-Day, the delegates who had earlier been accredited converged in their large numbers. The venue was well organised. Voting booths were well arranged, though there was no need for them in the end as the election was done by affirmation.
The only downside of the convention would have been a few aspirants’ complaints that they were denied access to nomination forms to contest. However, this was addressed and contained, and a consensus was reached.
One may argue that the success of the APC convention rested on its status as the governing party, with the paraphernalia of offices at the centre in Abuja, 31 state governors, resources, and the teeming members. While such an argument may be valid, it must be noted that not being in power should not preclude political parties from embracing planning and due diligence. In this regard, the opposition parties are clearly hiding behind a finger.
I have brought this up because there hasn’t been much discussion of how utterly puerile the opposition party conventions were. Yet, the importance of political activities such as party conventions and their implications for democracy and the rule of law cannot be overemphasised.
The conventions of ADC and PDP threw up several issues that are likely to have dire consequences for our democracy and the rule of law.
Firstly, both ADC and PDP conventions were products of deep internal splits, highlighting issues of factionalism and parallel party structures. The Nafiu Gombe/Leke Abejide faction rejected the ADC April 14 convention, saying the organisers “are not members of the party” and lacked locus standi. The faction accused the David Mark faction of forgery and spreading misinformation.
For the PDP, the party’s state chairmen were also split over the March convention.
While the Nyesom Wike faction backed the convention, the other faction led by Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, which had also earlier held its Ibadan convention in November 2025 in disregard of the court order and which the court later nullified, argued the March convention shouldn’t hold due to the pending Supreme Court case.
Another disheartening aspect is that court battles are now central to legitimacy within political parties. Both ADC and PDP factions used the courts to validate or nullify conventions. The ADC David Mark faction held its April 14 convention despite Federal High Court and Appeal Court orders restraining parties, which later became an argument over the true meaning of the legal maxims of “status quo ante and status quo ante bellum.”
The Appeal Court’s March 12, 2026, judgment was ignored in the process. While the PDP NEC, led by National Chairman Alhaji Abdulrahman Mohammed, the Wike faction, cited the Federal High Court Ibadan judgment upholding the caretaker leadership and directing INEC to recognise it, its opponents cited the pending Supreme Court case.
Closely related to that is the matter of INEC recognition that has now emerged as an elephant in the room. Both factions sought INEC attendance as proof of legitimacy. INEC’s absence at the April 14 ADC event is cited as evidence that it lacked official recognition. Also, the communiqué issued at the end of the PDP convention organised by the Wike faction urged INEC to obey the court ruling in the interest of constitutional order.
All of that has implications for the rule of law, democracy, and opposition politics. The rule of law should never be cherry-picked, yet it has apparently now become optional for party elites.
The ADC April 14 convention demonstrates that courts can issue restraining orders, but factions can proceed with their plans despite them. This is akin to promoting the rule of the jungle, where might is right. If parties ignore Appeal/Supreme Court orders with no consequence, it erodes judicial authority. It sets a dangerous precedent, transferring preeminence to political elites at the expense of constitutional order.
It has also emerged that INEC’s role is critical and decisive. Both ADC and PDP weaponised INEC’s attendance. INEC delisted Mark and Aregbesola’s names from the ADC portal on April 1, further shaping the crisis for which the party has called out the electoral commission.
It does not augur well for democracy if regulator neutrality is constantly questioned. Opposition parties spend more time fighting for INEC recognition than on citizen mobilisation and policy articulation.
It must be noted that, given all that has transpired, the opposition remains fragmented. This can only weaken checks that should be the hallmark of democratic governance. This means the 2027 “broad coalition” risks being stillborn if opposition parties can’t agree on basic procedures. A fragmented opposition benefits the ruling APC, reducing electoral competition. As one report put it, Nigerians are called to unite to “rescue Nigeria from alleged democratic decline, but the rescuers can’t hold a lawful convention.” For the opposition, internal democracy remains aspirational.
The gap between procedure on paper and practice remains wide. Parties preach due process but suspend members “in violation of due process”.
If conventions can’t be held without litigation, the electoral cycle will be dominated by pre-election cases, not campaigns. Voters get factional chaos, not policy choice.
APC’s relative stability in this critical period gives it an institutional advantage.
Many are wont to blame the opposition’s woes on the ruling party, but there is no evidence to support any untoward or arm-twisting tactics on the part of the government or governing party. If anything, the crisis could be attributed to the interplay of political forces within the same opposition parties.
However, the bottom line is this: the opposition conventions show Nigeria’s opposition is legally literate but politically undisciplined. The rule of law exists in judgments, but compliance is selective. For democracy, the danger isn’t just a strong ruling party or an alleged one-party rule. The danger is about opposition parties that can’t model the constitutional order they promise to deliver.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Rahman is Senior Special Assistant to President Bola Tinubu on Media & Publicity.
