The corridors of the All Progressives Congress (APC) headquarters in Abuja buzzed with restrained excitement and quiet intrigue on Thursday, as the party’s National Working Committee (NWC) concluded a meeting that would ripple across two geopolitical zones. In a double-pronged move that stunned observers and insiders alike, the ruling party disqualified one of its most prominent governorship aspirants in Ekiti State, Engr. Kayode Ojo, from contesting in its upcoming primary election, and simultaneously dissolved the entire State Executive Committee in Enugu. The decisions, though presented as procedural, carry deep political undertones that speak volumes about internal alignments, power consolidations, and the party’s calculated march toward the 2026 electoral cycle.
The official explanation for Ojo’s disqualification—“non-compliance with certain screening requirements”—was as terse as it was unconvincing to many within the party. To those who have followed Ekiti politics closely, it felt more like the culmination of a carefully orchestrated plan to streamline the race in favor of the incumbent governor, Biodun Oyebanji, than a mere bureaucratic outcome.
The Disqualification that Redrew Ekiti’s Political Map
Engr. Kayode Ojo, a successful businessman and engineer with a long history of political engagement in Ekiti, was not a fringe player. His name had become almost synonymous with intra-party contestation and grassroots mobilization in the state. Having first emerged as a formidable contender in the 2018 governorship primaries, where he ran on the same APC ticket eventually won by Dr. Kayode Fayemi, Ojo has long been a rallying point for party members who feel alienated by the central establishment’s dominance in Ekiti politics.
That he would once again find himself locked out of the race—this time not by popular vote but by party decree—has rekindled old debates about the APC’s internal democracy and the subtle mechanisms through which national leaders shape state outcomes. The NWC’s decision came after reviewing a report submitted by the party’s screening committee, which had been tasked with vetting aspirants for the Ekiti primaries. Yet, the contents of that report have not been made public, fueling speculation about what really transpired behind the scenes.
A senior APC official who spoke on condition of anonymity told reporters that Ojo’s disqualification had less to do with “paperwork or qualifications” and more with “strategic containment.” According to the source, “There was a consensus among the top hierarchy that Ekiti cannot afford another internal war. Ojo has his loyalists, and he’s very independent-minded. That’s dangerous in an election year where the party needs cohesion more than popularity contests.”
The Shadow of History: A Persistent Outsider
For years, Ojo’s political career has been defined by his uneasy relationship with the APC establishment. Though a loyal party man by formal affiliation, he has often been cast as a rebel within, someone unwilling to submit to the rigid hierarchies that dominate the APC’s structure in Ekiti. His past attempts to challenge what he called “the monopoly of power” within the state chapter earned him both admiration from the grassroots and suspicion from the leadership.
In 2018, his bid to clinch the governorship ticket ended in acrimony, with Ojo publicly decrying the process as rigged in favor of Kayode Fayemi, the eventual winner. Since then, he has remained a thorn in the side of the establishment, using his resources and influence to maintain relevance in local politics. His camps have often accused the party of sidelining loyal members who refuse to “bow to the cabal.”
But this time, the party machinery appears to have moved decisively against him. With his exclusion, the field is now narrowed to just two contenders: Governor Biodun Oyebanji, who is seeking re-election, and Omolayo Oluremi, a relatively lesser-known aspirant. The arithmetic of the contest now heavily tilts in Oyebanji’s favor, effectively turning what was expected to be a competitive primary into a coronation.
Party Unity or Power Consolidation?
The APC leadership has defended the decision as necessary to preserve unity and prevent factional crises ahead of the 2026 general elections. “The Ekiti chapter has been a hotbed of internal rivalry,” one NWC member said. “We have lost ground in past elections because of divided primaries and post-primary litigations. This time, we are determined to avoid that.”
However, political analysts argue that what the APC calls “unity” might, in reality, be the suppression of dissent. Dr. Tunde Adebayo, a political scientist at Ekiti State University, described the move as “an orchestrated neutralization of credible challengers.” In his words, “Party unity has become a euphemism for predetermined outcomes. When internal democracy is sacrificed for convenience, the party may win temporarily, but it loses legitimacy in the long run.”
Indeed, the echoes of past conflicts are hard to ignore. In 2014 and 2018, factional battles within the APC severely weakened its campaign machinery, contributing to narrow margins and defections. Those wounds, though papered over by subsequent electoral victories, remain unhealed beneath the surface. The disqualification of Ojo, some fear, could reopen them.
The Enugu Earthquake: Dissolving a Structure to Create Space
While the Ekiti decision dominated headlines, the dissolution of the APC’s Enugu State Executive Committee may ultimately prove to be the more consequential maneuver. The NWC’s announcement, coming at the same meeting, effectively sacked the entire state leadership of the party—a move that many interpret as a prelude to a political realignment involving Enugu’s sitting governor, Peter Mbah.
Governor Mbah, who was elected under the banner of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), has long been rumored to be on the verge of defecting to the APC. His administration has maintained unusually cordial relations with Abuja, and his recent attendance at select federal functions has not gone unnoticed. The dissolution of the state exco, therefore, appears to be the party’s way of clearing the path for a smooth transition—removing potential obstacles before Mbah’s formal crossover.
“This is classic pre-defection strategy,” an APC insider explained. “You dissolve the existing structure so that when the new heavyweight comes in, he can rebuild the house on his own terms. The Enugu exco was loyal to older factions. With them out, it’s a clean slate.”
If true, the move represents one of the most dramatic realignments in Southeast politics since 2015. Enugu has been a PDP stronghold for over two decades, consistently delivering overwhelming majorities to the opposition party. Bringing a sitting governor from such a bastion into the APC fold would not only shift the state’s balance of power but also signal the ruling party’s renewed determination to penetrate the Southeast—a region where it has historically struggled for acceptance.
The Political Calculus Behind the Moves
Taken together, the twin decisions—the Ekiti disqualification and the Enugu dissolution—reflect a broader pattern within the APC: centralization of power and consolidation ahead of 2026. Since the 2023 elections, President Bola Tinubu’s influence has loomed large over party strategy. Known for his emphasis on structure and loyalty, the president has been quietly but steadily reshaping the APC’s internal landscape, ensuring that every key state is either securely aligned or strategically neutralized.
In Ekiti, Oyebanji’s loyalty to the president and his role in stabilizing the state’s political machinery make him a preferred candidate. His re-election would cement the APC’s grip on one of the Southwest’s critical swing states. In Enugu, meanwhile, luring Peter Mbah—a wealthy technocrat with strong administrative credentials—could deliver both symbolic and strategic dividends: it would weaken the PDP and give the APC a credible foothold in the Southeast.
Fallout and Reactions
In Ekiti, reactions to Ojo’s disqualification have been predictably sharp. Supporters gathered at his Ado-Ekiti campaign office described the move as “a travesty of justice and democracy.” One supporter, who identified himself simply as Dare, told reporters, “They are afraid of his popularity. He’s the only man who can challenge Oyebanji on merit, and they know it. This is not screening; it is silencing.”
Ojo himself has remained largely reserved in his public comments, though sources close to him say he is considering legal action. “He’s consulting widely,” one aide revealed. “He believes the decision was politically motivated and wants to explore all constitutional options.”
In Enugu, the dissolved exco members reacted with a mixture of disbelief and resignation. Some have vowed to challenge the NWC’s decision, while others have hinted at defecting to smaller opposition parties. “We built this structure from nothing,” said a former state officer. “Now they want to hand it over to someone who has not lifted a finger for the APC. It’s unfair, but that’s politics.”
The Broader Implications
Beyond the immediate fallout, Thursday’s decisions underscore a growing trend in Nigerian politics—the increasing use of internal party mechanisms as instruments of power control. Where once elections and public campaigns defined political strength, today’s contests are often decided in the closed chambers of party secretariats. The APC, like its predecessors, has mastered this art, using technicalities, dissolutions, and restructuring to shape outcomes before ballots are even cast.
This shift raises deeper questions about the health of internal democracy in Nigeria’s political system. When the ruling party can determine its candidates through backroom maneuvers rather than transparent primaries, voters are effectively presented with predetermined choices, reducing elections to formalities rather than genuine contests of ideas.
Yet, for the APC’s national leadership, such centralization is not without logic. The party has learned—often the hard way—that internal disputes can be more damaging than external competition. Factional litigations, court-ordered candidate substitutions, and splinter defections have cost it key states in past election cycles. The disqualification of Ojo and the dissolution in Enugu, therefore, can be seen as preventive medicine—harsh, perhaps, but in the party’s view, necessary.
What Lies Ahead
As the dust settles, all eyes will now turn to how these developments reshape political alliances ahead of the next election cycle. In Ekiti, Governor Oyebanji is almost assured of victory in the primaries, but the discontent brewing beneath the surface could translate into apathy or even quiet rebellion within the rank and file. In Enugu, the next few weeks will likely reveal whether Peter Mbah’s rumored defection materializes—and whether it can deliver the kind of political realignment the APC envisions.
One thing, however, is certain: these are not isolated incidents. They are part of a broader recalibration of power within Nigeria’s ruling party—one that seeks to tighten control, eliminate unpredictability, and reinforce the dominance of a centralized structure in preparation for future battles.
In the end, the stories of Kayode Ojo and the Enugu exco are not merely about individuals or regional politics. They are chapters in a larger narrative of how power is negotiated, preserved, and sometimes imposed within the framework of Nigerian democracy. And as the APC continues to perfect this delicate balance between discipline and domination, it is the political future of states like Ekiti and Enugu that will bear the marks—either of stability or of simmering resistance yet to unfold.
Word count: ~1,962
Post a Comment