By Louis Achi
The controversially scripted emergence of Ahmed Tijjani Galadima Aminu as the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate in Adamawa State for the 2027 election has, not surprisingly, triggered a crucial debate about internal party democracy, disruptive elite influence, procedural legitimacy and the management of political ambition within Nigeria’s ruling party.
A fundamental question flows from the core of this controversy. Can a political party credibly claim to represent the democratic aspirations of its members when a nomination process is widely seen by aggrieved stakeholders as the product of elite imposition rather than an open and transparent contest?
First, political parties are indispensable institutions of representative democracy. They organise political competition, aggregate interests, recruit leaders and provide citizens with choices at elections. Their internal procedures therefore matter not only to their members but also to the credibility of the wider electoral system.
When aspirants invest time, money, organisation and political capital in a contest, they do so with the expectation that the applicable rules will govern the outcome.
If the rules are applied consistently, even a losing aspirant may find it easier to accept defeat. But if the rules are selectively enforced, the same defeat can be interpreted as evidence that participation is futile. This is how internal grievances become institutional problems. And unfortunately, this is the story unfolding in Adamawa ahead of the 2027 general elections.
A key danger here is that members who believe their votes, dignity or organisational contributions have been cavalierly discounted may withdraw their commitment, refuse to mobilise for the party’s candidate, defect to rival platforms or pursue legal challenges. This scenario is already playing out.
Where party members perceive that the result was settled in advance, even a formally declared winner will definitely inherit a damaging credibility problem within the organisation that nominated him.
A significant dimension of the controversy is the strong allegation that Galadima enjoyed the backing of National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu and his brother. Reports published by The Guardian and Premium Times documented concerns about the influence of powerful political figures, the credibility of the primary and the grievances of rival aspirants.
The Guardian newspaper had reported that Ribadu’s support for Galadima had become a source of palpable tension among party stakeholders, some of whom have strongly questioned whether the aspirant possessed an independent political base commensurate with the demands of a statewide governorship contest.
The same report recorded warnings from party members against allowing the nomination process to become an exercise in blatant imposition – which it has unfortunately become. When this happens, the party’s name remains, its membership register survives, and its electoral ambitions continue, but the democratic substance that should animate its internal life begins to evaporate.
Party leaders cannot make a credible dispute disappear merely by insisting that a candidate has already been declared. The appropriate response is transparent verification of the disputed records and recourse to the procedures established by law.
This is the troubling institutional question raised by the Movement for Justice in Adamawa State (MOJA) over the emergence of the APC governorship candidate for the 2027 election – Ahmed Tijjani Galadima Aminu. MOJA unambiguously alleges that two brothers – Nuhu Ribadu who is the NSA, and his brother – effectively determined the party’s governorship candidate without a genuine primary election or a valid consensus arrangement.
MOJA’s position raises a legitimate question the APC cannot reasonably dismiss as mere political discontent. Can two individuals legitimately substitute their private decision for the prescribed collective process of a political party with hundreds of thousands of registered members?
The leader of MOJA, Barr. Hamid Mahmud, Walin Mubi, a prominent Nigerian politician and traditional title holder from Adamawa State cuts to the heart of the matter when he drew attention to the, “The undemocratic posturing of the duo who manipulated the process for the APC governorship candidate to emerge without party primaries; the violation of the express provisions of the party’s constitution; and the consequences of the violation. Then, the disregard of my petitions to both the national chairman of the party and the president himself.”
According to Barr. Hamid Mahmud, “It would be recalled that in 2023, Nuhu Ribadu contested for the governorship of Adamawa State on the platform of APC and lost the nomination. Someone who couldn’t secure the nomination of the party has no business singlehandedly nominating party’s governorship candidate.
“Nothing entitles him to this influence, considering his past poor political performance. After losing the nomination, instead of accepting defeat faithfully and working for the ticket he chose and embarked on anti-party activities.
“The candidate won the election in spite of their anti-activities. The current governor who then lost the election petitioned the election tribunal on the despicable roles played by certain individuals in subverting the cause of justice.
“I have deposed to an affidavit before a notary public and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria detailing what transpired before, during, and after the last governorship election. Unless he atones for his sins and stop meddling with the judiciary, I will cause the publication of the affidavit mentioned earlier in some national newspapers and let us see who will ever want to associate with him.
“A party that has the president of the country and majority of the governors and members of the national assembly yet cannot conduct something as basic as primary election has no business being in politics.”
Further according to MOJA, “The actions of some stakeholders suggest a troubling disregard for this reality, as though the hundreds of thousands of APC members in Adamawa State do not matter. Such an approach raises legitimate concerns about inclusiveness, internal democracy and the extent to which the interests and aspirations of ordinary party members are reflected in decisions that could shape the party’s political future.”
MOJA’s statement also invokes two important figures: more than 900,000 APC members in Adamawa State and 2,196,566 registered voters. It argues that the interests of such a substantial political constituency cannot be treated as subordinate to the preferences of two individuals.
The figures perform different functions. The party membership figure, which MOJA cites speaks to the scale of the party’s internal constituency. The voter figure reflects Adamawa’s electorate as recorded for the 2023 general election; it should not automatically be treated as the final register for 2027.
MOJA’s account is that neither a valid primary nor a properly constituted consensus process occurred and this makes the controversy more than an internal disagreement. It raises a serious question that the party’s established rules were not observed at all.
The legal dimension of this controversy is indispensable. The APC Constitution and the applicable electoral legislation establish the framework within which candidates must emerge. Because the disputed nomination concerns the 2027 election, the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 must be examined alongside the party’s applicable nomination guidelines.
This matters because MOJA’s statement refers to methods of nomination, including indirect primaries. The applicable 2026 legal framework must be consulted rather than assuming that every provision of the earlier Electoral Act 2022 remains unchanged.
Was a direct primary actually conducted in accordance with the applicable rules? If consensus was the chosen method, did the cleared aspirants provide the consent required by law? Were the prescribed party procedures followed, documented and completed?
If the prescribed procedure was followed, the relevant records should help establish that fact. The governing principle is simple: the rules bind the powerful as much as they bind ordinary party members.
The allegation acquires an additional institutional dimension because one of the individuals named by MOJA is Nuhu Ribadu, the serving National Security Adviser. The office of the NSA carries responsibilities relating to national security and strategic coordination. It does not, by virtue of its constitutional or administrative standing, confer authority to replace the APC’s prescribed procedures for selecting a state governorship candidate.
If evidence establishes that a public office was used to override lawful party processes, the matter would raise concerns extending beyond APC internal politics. It would touch on the boundaries between public responsibility and partisan influence.
MOJA’s strongest point concerns the treatment of party membership. Political parties often celebrate their membership figures when mobilising supporters, presenting their organisational strength or making claims about their grassroots reach.
Yet the same members may discover that their influence appears to diminish sharply when the party must make its most consequential internal decision – selecting the person who will represent it in an election.
Party members are not merely names on a register. They provide the local organisation, political advocacy, community relationships and campaign labour on which electoral participation depends.
If the APC’s Adamawa membership exceeds 900,000, as MOJA asserts, the organisation has an obvious interest in demonstrating that its nomination process was credible, inclusive to the extent required by the applicable rules and free from arbitrary imposition. A party’s internal democracy is not measured solely by how many members it can recruit. It is also measured by whether the procedures it establishes have practical force when influential individuals have strong preferences.
Against the backdrop of the scripted controversy, MOJA petitioned the APC national chairman and President Bola Tinubu over the alleged irregularities but received no response. That MOJA’s petition was ignored raises a legitimate question about the party’s internal accountability mechanisms.
A functioning political organisation needs procedures for addressing disputes, correcting irregularities and explaining decisions to its members. A substantive complaint about candidate selection deserves a process through which its claims can be examined and answered.
If the petitions were received and the party leadership did not respond, that silence could deepen the perception that internal grievances are treated differently depending on the influence of those involved.
The national leadership should have an institutional interest in clarifying the matter. If the nomination was conducted properly, the relevant records and a reasoned explanation could help resolve the dispute.
From what is playing out, cavalier, arrogant imposition would appear to have won the day for Ribadu and APC – or actually lost the day. President Tinubu’s publicly stated emphasis on compliance with the Electoral Act and the party constitution in the conduct of APC primaries provides a relevant standard against which the Adamawa process can be assessed.
If the APC expects its members to respect its constitution, it must demonstrate that the constitution also constrains those with the greatest access to power. If it expects aspirants to accept the outcome of a nomination process, it must be able to show that the outcome was reached through the applicable rules. But the horse may have bolted, if the words of MOJA leader, Barr. Hamid Mahmud, Walin Mubi is correctly interpreted.
“I had protested not only to the office of the National Chairman of the party but also to the office of Mr. President, drawing their attentions to the illegality that took place in the name of primary election in Adamawa State. None of the two offices responded to my petitions. I posted these letters through the D.H.L. offices at Wuse, the security agencies can verify my claims. We are left with no option but to support candidates of our choice. Any party is better than APC in Adamawa State.”