A SUPPRESSED PARTY DEMOCRACY: WHEN PRIMARY WINNERS BECOME COMPLAINERS
E-ISSN: 2354-4481
By John Mbonu Uchenwoke-Ekperechi
The strength of any democracy is measured not only by the credibility of its general elections but, more importantly, by the integrity of the processes through which political parties choose their candidates. Democracy begins within political parties. When internal democracy is weakened, the entire democratic structure is placed at risk.
The recent developments surrounding the All Progressives Congress (APC) 2026 National Assembly primaries have once again exposed one of the greatest threats to Nigeria's democracy—the gradual erosion of internal party democracy.
Across several states, aspirants who were publicly celebrated as winners of the party's direct primaries suddenly discovered that their victories had disappeared after the review of petitions by the party's Appeals Committee. Those who celebrated became mourners. Winners became complainants. Those believed to have lost suddenly emerged as candidates.
Whether every replacement was procedurally justified is a matter for the party's internal mechanisms and, where necessary, the courts. However, beyond the legality of the process lies a more fundamental question: What becomes of democracy when the outcome of a direct primary appears disconnected from the expectations of many participants?
The Promise of Direct Primaries
The APC adopted the Direct Primary (Option A4) system for its 2026 primaries. The philosophy behind direct primaries is simple and commendable.
It is designed to take political power away from a handful of delegates and return it to ordinary party members. Every registered member is expected to have a voice. Every vote is expected to count. The process is intended to deepen participation, strengthen legitimacy, reduce manipulation and inspire public confidence in political parties.
Direct primaries were introduced to cure many of the defects associated with delegate systems, where allegations of money politics, influence-buying and elite manipulation often overshadowed the wishes of ordinary party members.
If, after members have openly participated in a direct primary, the eventual list of candidates differs substantially from what many participants believed they voted for, difficult questions naturally arise about transparency, consistency and public confidence.
A Dangerous Signal for Democracy
Internal democracy is the nursery of national democracy.
If political parties cannot transparently manage their own internal elections, how can citizens confidently trust them to manage public elections?
The greatest casualty of controversies surrounding party primaries is public trust.
When party members begin to believe that participation does not necessarily determine outcomes, enthusiasm gradually disappears. Members become spectators instead of stakeholders.
The dangerous message becomes:
"Why vote if the result can still change elsewhere?"
That perception alone can discourage political participation and weaken democratic culture.
Declining Internal Democracy
Nigeria's political parties have witnessed a disturbing decline in internal democracy over the years.
Across party lines, complaints have become increasingly familiar:
Suppression of dissenting voices.
Limited internal debate.
Increasing influence of political godfathers.
The growing perception of money-driven politics.
Weak institutional checks within parties.
Decisions that many members perceive as being determined more by power than by transparent competition.
Whether these perceptions are accurate in every case or not, they have become widespread enough to damage confidence in the political system.
When members lose confidence in internal party processes, loyalty weakens.
Instead of strengthening political institutions, politicians increasingly invest in powerful individuals rather than party structures.
The Cost to Party Loyalty
Political loyalty is built on fairness.
Party members sacrifice resources, time and energy because they believe that rules will be respected.
Whenever contestants conclude that transparent victories can still become uncertain after the process, frustration naturally follows.
That frustration often leads to protests, defections, prolonged litigation or quiet political sabotage during general elections.
History has repeatedly shown that many electoral defeats begin with unresolved grievances from party primaries.
The consequences rarely end inside the party.
They affect campaign morale, fundraising, grassroots mobilisation and ultimately electoral performance.
The Effect on Voter Confidence
Nigerians are already battling declining voter turnout.
Many citizens believe elections no longer adequately reflect their choices.
If controversies now extend deeply into internal party primaries, citizens may begin questioning not only general elections but also the processes that produce those seeking public office.
Democracy survives on confidence.
Confidence cannot exist where transparency is doubted.
Democracy Must Start from Within
Political parties are often described as the gatekeepers of democracy.
If those gates become opaque, democracy itself suffers.
This is not an issue peculiar to one political party. It is a challenge confronting Nigeria's political system as a whole.
Every political party—whether in government or opposition—must continually strengthen internal democracy, uphold transparent rules, communicate decisions clearly and ensure that members believe their participation truly matters.
Appeal mechanisms are legitimate and necessary. Genuine errors deserve correction. However, such processes should be transparent, evidence-based and communicated in ways that preserve members' confidence in the integrity of the primary election.
The Way Forward
Nigeria's democracy cannot mature unless political parties themselves become democratic institutions.
Internal democracy should not merely exist in party constitutions; it must be visible in practice.
Political parties should publish clear guidelines, transparently communicate appeal decisions, strengthen independent appeal panels and provide members with confidence that every complaint is resolved fairly and consistently.
Most importantly, the votes and voices of ordinary party members must remain the foundation of candidate selection.
Conclusion
The APC primary controversy should serve as an opportunity for reflection rather than merely a partisan debate.
Regardless of political affiliation, Nigerians should be concerned whenever questions arise about the credibility of internal democratic processes.
Democracy is strongest when political victories are accepted because participants trust the process.
The Direct Primary (Option A4) system was introduced to return power to party members, encourage wider participation and deepen public trust. Preserving those objectives is essential if internal democracy is to remain meaningful.
Ultimately, democracy does not begin at the polling unit on election day. It begins inside political parties. When internal democracy is strengthened, national democracy becomes stronger. When it is weakened, the confidence of party members, voters and the nation itself is diminished.
John Mbonu Uchenwoke-Ekperechi Publisher Editor-in-Chief Inside Agwa News (IAN), and Columnist, Shadow of the Flag.
