APC

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has reacted to the death of former House of Representatives member, Hon. Abba Anas Adamu, who reportedly died while in the custody of bandits after his abduction along the Kaduna-Abuja highway.

Reports indicated that the former lawmaker was kidnapped on May 3, 2026, and died nine days later despite efforts by his family to secure his freedom.

Reacting to the incident, Atiku described the development as another sign of the growing security challenges facing the country under the current administration.

“His death is yet another grim reminder of the worsening collapse of security under the Tinubu administration,” he said.

The former vice-president spoke through a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu.

According to Atiku, the death of a former federal lawmaker in the hands of kidnappers reflects what he described as the government’s inability to fulfil its constitutional responsibility of protecting lives and property.

“Let us be brutally honest: Nigeria is under siege, and the Tinubu administration appears either overwhelmed, indifferent, or dangerously incompetent in the face of this national emergency.

“When a former member of the National Assembly can be abducted on one of the country’s most strategic highways and die in captivity, what hope remains for the ordinary Nigerian who lacks visibility, influence, or protection?

“This is no longer about isolated incidents. It is now a horrifying pattern. Nigerians are being kidnapped from highways, farms, communities, and even their homes, while the government continues to issue sterile statements and recycled assurances that bear no resemblance to the lived reality of our people.

“Under this administration, insecurity has evolved from a crisis into a cruel national routine. Citizens now travel with prayers instead of protection. Families sleep with one eye open. Businesses are shutting down, farmers are abandoning their land, and entire communities are being surrendered to criminals.

“A government that cannot secure its highways cannot claim to govern. A government that watches citizens get hunted like prey has failed the most elementary test of leadership.

“It is particularly tragic that the Abuja-Kaduna corridor and surrounding routes have remained notorious theatres of terror despite repeated promises, security budgets running into trillions, and endless propaganda about progress.

“Nigerians deserve answers. What exactly is the security strategy of this administration? Where is the urgency? Where is the accountability? How many more deaths must be recorded before this government realises that press releases do not defeat bandits?

“No amount of political spin can deodorise this failure. A nation where former lawmakers die in captivity while criminals operate with audacity is a nation in distress.

“At this point, what Nigerians need is not another hollow condolence message. They need decisive leadership, coherent action, and measurable results.”

Atiku also sympathised with the family of the deceased, the people of Jigawa State and Nigerians affected by insecurity across the country.

He urged the Federal Government to address the worsening security situation with urgency and take stronger measures to protect citizens.

By Aremu Haroon Abiodun

Let me begin with clarity and sincerity. I write this not as a partisan actor, not as a loyalist of any political party, and certainly not as a hired megaphone for any candidate. I write from the standpoint of an analyst, a student of democratic behaviour, and a public relations strategist who understands that politics is not only about power; it is also about perception, timing, trust, and structure.

This piece is not designed to insult President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, attack the ruling APC, mock the opposition, or discredit any politician. Rather, it is an honest attempt to interrogate one of the most defining questions of Nigeria’s approaching democratic race: Is the new coalition a movement of salvation or merely a market of ambition?

In every democracy, coalitions can either rescue nations or ruin trust. In Africa, where democracy is still battling poverty, elite capture, and personality politics, the answer matters deeply. Across the continent, from Kenya to South Africa, Senegal to Zimbabwe, fragmented opposition groups often unite to challenge incumbents. Sometimes they succeed; sometimes they collapse under the weight of ego and suspicion.

Coalitions are usually built on five promises: to rescue the nation, restore democracy, defeat bad governance, unite the opposition vote, and provide a better alternative. But behind these promises often lie hidden motives: personal ambition, ticket negotiation, political survival, revenge against former allies, and access to state power. This is why many coalitions look holy in public but bleed distrust in private.

Nigeria may now be entering that exact season. The African Democratic Congress (ADC), once a relatively minor platform, is suddenly being discussed as a possible shelter for heavyweight politicians dissatisfied with their former homes. But before Nigerians clap, they must ask a dangerous question: Do the coalition members even trust themselves? 

Parties are not built by logos; they are built by loyalty, and loyalty cannot be photocopied overnight.

Nigeria’s politics has become a railway station where leaders keep changing platforms while asking voters to stay loyal.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu did not emerge by accident. His journey moved through the AD, AC, ACN, and finally the APC. He mastered a core truth that many others underestimated: structure beats noise.

While others chased headlines, Tinubu built networks, state influence, and grassroots machinery. Whether loved or criticised, he represents a masterclass in long-term political engineering.

Atiku’s route has been equally dramatic, moving from the PDP to the APC, back to the PDP, and now toward discussions with ADC. No politician in modern Nigeria has contested the presidency with as much persistence. 

Supporters call it resilience; critics call it endless ambition. But as time moves on, the ADC coalition may represent strategic urgency rather than just ideology, a final gamble in a house where the inheritance is uncertain.

Peter Obi’s path from APGA to the PDP, the Labour Party, and now ADC tells the story of a reformer searching for a machine. Obi proved in 2023 that popularity can shake systems, but popularity without nationwide structure has limits. 

If Obi brings credibility and a coalition brings machinery, the equation is powerful. However, can a reformist brand coexist with old political warlords? Movements are powered by hope, but coalitions are powered by compromise.

Moving from the PDP to the APC, the NNPP, and now the ADC, Kwankwaso commands a loyal bloc in the North. He has what every coalition needs—a dedicated voter base—but he also has what coalitions fear: independent ambition. The success of any merger will depend on whether arithmetic can overcome ego.

The urgency for a coalition is often driven by the stark reality of election data. In Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election, the opposition’s fragmentation was clear. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu won with 8,794,726 votes (36.6%), while the combined votes of the three main opposition candidates, Atiku Abubakar (6,984,520), Peter Obi (6,101,533), and Rabiu Kwankwaso (1,496,687), totalled 14,582,740.

Mathematically, the opposition held over 60% of the total vote, but their inability to unite resulted in a win for the incumbent’s structure. This “voter math” is the primary engine behind the current migration toward the ADC; politicians realise that without a unified front, sentiment rarely defeats a settled structure.

Having that in mind, can Atiku trust Obi? Can Obi trust establishment figures? Can Kwankwaso trust a ticket arrangement? Coalitions often fail not because they lack votes, but because they lack trust.

Sooner or later, the “Ticket War” arrives. If Atiku wants one last shot, Obi believes his momentum was stolen, and Kwankwaso believes northern arithmetic favours him, the smiles will disappear. A coalition before a primary is romance; a coalition after a primary is war.

Furthermore, many underestimate the “Tinubu Factor.” Hatred of an incumbent is not a development plan. Tinubu remains a formidable strategist because he controls incumbency power and understands coalition management better than many of his rivals. To defeat a strategist, anger is insufficient, but superior organisation could be the way out.

From a strategic communication perspective, the narratives are already forming. APC’s narrative centres on stability, continuity, and ongoing reforms. ADC represents a force for “Rescue Nigeria,” unites the opposition, and restores hope.

Both parties face a risk. The ADC risks being seen as a shelter for serial defectors, while the APC risks seeming disconnected from economic pain.

Lastline 

Nigeria does not merely need a coalition of politicians; it needs a coalition of ideas, competence, and national healing. If the ADC becomes a real reform movement, it can change history. If it becomes only a marketplace of ambition, it will prove that parties change names faster than systems change realities.

The real contest of 2027 may not be APC vs. ADC. It will be structure vs sentiment, trust vs suspicion, and nationhood vs ambition. On that day, Nigerians, not politicians, will deliver the final verdict on who rules in the next four years.

Haroon Aremu is a public relations strategist and wrote in via exponentumera@gmail.com.

By Anas Abbas

Siyako Anthony Yaro, a Senator Representing Gombe South Senatorial District has resigned from the All Progressives Congress (APC) to Peoples Democratic party ( PDP)  after rejecting the party’s reported consensus arrangement ahead of the 2027 political activities.

The senator, announced his resignation in a letter addressed to party officials, citing dissatisfaction with internal decisions and the alleged imposition of candidates through a consensus process.

He maintained that the arrangement was contrary to democratic principles within the party.

The senator stressed that his return to the PDP should not be viewed as political desperation or inconsistency, but as a demonstration of responsibility and commitment to the people he represents.

“To my supporters and constituents, I ask that you see this return not as a sign of confusion, but as an act of courage and accountability. My loyalty has always been, and will always be, to the people first,” he stated

The senator expressed concern over what he described as a lack of transparency and inclusiveness in the party’s internal affairs, stressing that members should be allowed to participate freely in competitive contests rather than adopting imposed agreements.

Sources within the party said the development has generated fresh political tension in Gombe State, especially as consultations and alignments ahead of future elections continue to intensify.

The resignation is seen as another setback for the APC in the state, with political observers suggesting that the move could influence emerging alliances and future political calculations in the region.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Bauchi State Governor, Bala Mohammed, has picked the senate nomination form of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) five days after formally joining the party.

Mohammed resigned from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on May 2 and moved to the APM, citing prolonged court cases and internal disputes within the PDP as reasons for his departure.

In his statement issued on Thursday, the governor confirmed that he picked the nomination form during the APM National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting held at the party’s national headquarters.

“During the meeting, I officially picked up my nomination form to contest for the senate seat representing Bauchi south senatorial district under the platform of the APM ahead of the forthcoming elections,” he said.

The NEC meeting was presided over by Yusuf Mamman Dantalle, the party’s national chairman, and focused on key national and internal party issues. The session also provided an opportunity for Mohammed to formally engage with the party’s leadership structure.

He noted that Nigeria’s political environment has become increasingly difficult due to “undemocratic practices and political intimidation”, which he said have limited genuine participation for progressive leaders and movements.

Following consultations with political associates, stakeholders, and supporters across the country, Mohammed said the APM emerged as the most suitable platform for his political direction.

He explained that the party aligns with his political values, especially in the areas of good governance, internal democracy, justice, inclusiveness, and respect for the rule of law.

“I further emphasised that our decision to join the party was driven by conviction and the desire to contribute meaningfully to building a stronger democratic culture in Nigeria,” he said.

Mohammed also disclosed that several political office holders and stakeholders who were previously aligned with the PDP structure in Bauchi have followed him into the APM.

These include members of the National Assembly, the Bauchi State House of Assembly, local government chairmen, commissioners, ward executives, party officials, and other supporters at the grassroots level.

The governor assured the party leadership of his commitment to contribute resources, experience, and political support toward strengthening the APM ahead of future elections.

By Anwar Usman

Fresh political realignments rocked the House of Representatives on Thursday as five lawmakers abandoned the All Progressives Congress and the Peoples Democratic Party for the Nigeria Democratic Congress and the African Democratic Congress ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Among those who switched parties were Muhammed El-Rufai, son of former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai, who represents Kaduna North Federal Constituency.

Muhammed El-Rufai defected from the APC to the NDC, a development political observers view as a strong indication of the deepening rift between his father and the ruling party.

The political realignment was contained in a statement read by the Speaker of the House, Tajudeen Abbas, during plenary on Thursday.
‎
‎Muhammed El-Rufai’s exit came months after speculations over his political future following the increasing criticism of President Bola Tinubu’s administration by his father, Nasir El-Rufai.
‎
‎The former governor, once a key ally of Tinubu and a prominent APC figure, has in recent months openly accused the ruling party of abandoning internal democracy and sidelining loyal stakeholders.
‎
‎Joshua Obika, representing Abaji/Gwagwalada/Kuje/Kwali Federal Constituency of the Federal Capital Territory also joined the NDC.

In the same vein, Abdulhakeem Kamilu, representing Wudil/Garko Federal Constituency of Kano State, dumped the ADC for the NDC, citing what he described as unresolved leadership issues within the party.

In another development, two lawmakers from Kaduna State, Suleiman Richifa and Umar Ajilo, defected from the PDP to the ADC.
‎
‎The lawmakers linked their defection to the lingering crisis within the PDP at both the state and national levels.
‎
‎The latest defections came barely days after 17 lawmakers reportedly aligned with the NDC, underscoring growing efforts by opposition politicians to build a coalition capable of challenging the APC in the 2027 elections.
‎
‎The development further altered the political composition of the House and fuelled speculations that more defections may occur in the coming months as political consultations intensify ahead of the next election cycle.

By Uzair Adam

Former Kano State Governor, Dr Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, has said the final decision on the ongoing Kano emirship dispute rests with the Supreme Court, stressing that Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf will be bound to implement the court’s verdict in line with the rule of law.

Ganduje stated this while reacting to reports alleging that he had endorsed Muhammadu Sanusi II as the Emir of Kano and Chairman of the Kano State Council of Chiefs.

In a statement issued by his former Commissioner of Information and current Chief of Staff, Muhammad Garba, the ex-governor described the reports as a misinterpretation of his remarks during the swearing-in ceremony of the Deputy Governor.

He explained that his reference to Sanusi by his traditional title at the event was purely out of respect and adherence to protocol, not an endorsement.

“It is important to clarify that what happened was simply an expression of respect in a public gathering. It should not be misconstrued as an endorsement,” Ganduje said.

He noted that the emirship tussle remains before the court, warning that comments on the matter must be made cautiously to avoid contempt.

Ganduje recalled that the Court of Appeal had earlier directed all parties to maintain the status quo pending the final determination of the case by the Supreme Court.

He explained that the current legal position recognises Aminu Ado Bayero as the 15th Emir of Kano and Muhammadu Sanusi II as the 14th Emir, pending the apex court’s ruling.

The former governor added that he lacks the constitutional authority to endorse or reject any claimant, noting that the responsibility lies solely with the judiciary and, subsequently, the state government.

He further criticised sections of the media for amplifying the issue, saying a routine remark was taken out of context.

“The interpretation being given to the remark is clearly exaggerated,” he said, urging all parties to remain calm and await the Supreme Court judgment expected next year.

By Usman Muhammad Salihu

In Nigerian politics, defections are no longer surprising. What is surprising now is how quickly they happen and how easily political actors move from one platform to another.

The recent defection of Peter Obi and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso from the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) is not just another political adjustment. It is a bold move. But bold does not always mean safe.

At first glance, the decision appears strategic. Internal crises within the ADC, legal uncertainties, and the pressure of electoral timelines make stability a priority. From that angle, shifting to a new platform may seem like a necessary step, an attempt to secure political ground ahead of a highly competitive 2027.

There is also strength in the alliance itself. The coming together of Obi and Kwankwaso brings national attention, regional balance, and an existing base of supporters. On paper, that is not just movement; it is potential consolidation.

But politics is not played on paper. It is played among the people. And this is where the real challenge begins.

The Nigeria Democratic Congress is still largely unfamiliar to many Nigerians. Beyond political circles and elite discussions, its presence at the grassroots remains limited. For a significant number of voters, especially at the lower levels, NDC is not yet a known political identity.

And in Nigerian elections, familiarity matters. Voters do not just choose candidates. They choose what they recognise. They choose what they trust. They choose what they understand. That is the gap this move must overcome.

Beyond visibility, there are emerging concerns about the platform’s stability. Reports suggest that the Nigerian Democratic Congress may be grappling with internal legal disputes. If proven true, this introduces an even more delicate risk. Moving from one troubled platform to another does not resolve instability; it simply transfers it. And in politics, uncertainty is a cost few can afford at this level.

Because this is no longer just about transferring political influence, it is about building voter awareness from the ground up within a limited time frame. That is not a small task. It is one thing to move with loyalists. It is another thing to move with the electorate. And history has shown that the two do not always align.

There is also a deeper concern. Frequent political movement, no matter how strategic, raises questions of consistency. When platforms change too often, voters begin to look beyond the movement itself and ask a more difficult question: What exactly is constant? Is it ideology? Is it vision? Or is it simply positioning?

These questions matter because today’s voter is less passive than before. There is growing awareness, scrutiny, and an expectation for clarity. So while this move may be necessary from a political standpoint, it is also risky from a public perception angle.

Because speed in politics can be a double-edged sword. Move too slowly, and you lose relevance. Move too quickly, and you lose trust. And right now, this move feels fast. Perhaps calculated. Perhaps unavoidable. But still fast.

So, is this a strategy or a survival tactic? It is arguably both. Strategy, because the timing aligns with political realities. Survival, because unstable platforms leave little room for hesitation.

From another angle, this move is not just a strategy or a matter of survival; it is a gamble. A calculated one, no doubt, but a gamble, nonetheless. It rests on the assumption that political influence can be transferred faster than voter trust can be built. And in a system where recognition often shapes voting decisions, that assumption may prove too optimistic.

But beyond both lies a more uncomfortable possibility: That this could be a leap into a platform that has yet to fully exist in the minds of the people. Because, in the end, political strength is not measured by alliances alone, but by acceptance. And acceptance cannot be transferred overnight.

So, while the move may look bold in Abuja, its real test will come far away from strategy rooms, in markets, in villages, and at the polling units. Where names are remembered, where symbols are recognised, and where unfamiliar platforms are often rejected.

And if that gap is not closed in time, what appears today as a strategy may tomorrow be seen as a miscalculation. Because in Nigerian politics, you can move ahead of the system, but you cannot move ahead of the people. And when that gap exists, even the most calculated move can quickly turn into a costly gamble.

Ultimately, this move will be judged by one metric: conversion rate. How many Obidients and Kwankwasiyya become NDC members, not just in spirit but on the ballot? If the answer is “most,” then history will call it strategy. If the answer is “some,” then it was survival. If the answer is “few,” then it was a miscalculation dressed as ambition. The voters are watching, and their silence right now is louder than any endorsement. For Obi and Kwankwaso, the real campaign did not start in Abuja. It starts the day a trader in Aba and a farmer in Gaya can point to the NDC logo and say, “That is us.”

Usman Muhammad Salihu was among the pioneer fellows of PRNigeria and writes from Jos.

muhammadu5363@gmail.com.

By Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu

As Nigeria moves gradually toward the 2027 general election, the most consequential political drama may not be unfolding within the ruling party, but among those seeking to unseat it. Across the opposition space, there is visible movement: coalition talks, strategic meetings, defections, counter-defections, legal disputes and renewed ambitions. Yet beneath all the activity lies an old and stubborn question: can Nigeria’s opposition finally unite around a credible alternative, or will familiar rivalries once again deliver victory to the incumbent?

The latest controversy surrounding Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso’s political future has brought that question sharply into focus. Reports recently circulated that the former Kano State governor and his political associates were considering leaving the African Democratic Congress (ADC) for another platform, the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), citing fears that the ADC had become vulnerable to legal complications and possible political sabotage. The speculation intensified after statements from individuals linked to the Kwankwasiyya movement suggested fresh political calculations were underway.

Kwankwaso himself later issued a clarification. He stated that no final decision had been taken regarding his political future or that of his associates, while confirming that consultations were ongoing with stakeholders across multiple parties. It was a carefully worded intervention. It neither closed the door to the ADC nor ruled out future movement elsewhere. In effect, it confirmed what many political observers already suspected: Nigeria’s opposition remains in a season of negotiation rather than consolidation.

For many Nigerians dissatisfied with the current direction of governance, the ADC had recently emerged as a possible umbrella for a broad anti-incumbent coalition. With the Peoples Democratic Party weakened by years of internal crisis and the Labour Party still struggling to convert popularity into a nationwide structure, the ADC appeared to offer something useful: a relatively fresh platform around which major opposition actors could gather.

But Nigerian political history offers a warning. Coalitions are easiest to announce and hardest to sustain.

The challenge before the ADC was never simply about attracting prominent names. It was always about managing them. Once major political figures occupy the same platform, difficult questions naturally arise. Who gets the presidential ticket? Which region should produce the candidate? Who controls party machinery? Who funds mobilisation? Who steps down for whom? These are not procedural details. They are often the very fault lines that break apart coalitions.

Kwankwaso’s position illustrates this reality. He remains one of the most significant opposition actors in northern Nigeria, with a loyal political base that has survived multiple party transitions. The Kwankwasiyya movement has demonstrated unusual cohesion and emotional commitment over the years. That makes him valuable to any coalition seeking national competitiveness.

Yet his role also generates tension. Admirers see him as experienced, disciplined and electorally relevant. Critics see him as a strategic power broker whose bargaining posture can complicate broader unity efforts. Social media reactions to the latest controversy reflect this divide. Some accuse him of prioritising leverage over coalition stability. Others argue that he is merely refusing to lead his supporters into another uncertain political arrangement.

Both arguments contain elements of truth. No serious opposition coalition can ignore Kwankwaso’s political weight. But no coalition can thrive if every major actor insists on maximum personal advantage.

Peter Obi presents a different but equally important dimension of the opposition equation. He commands strong youth enthusiasm, urban support and reform-minded voters who remain deeply invested in his message. His appeal extends beyond conventional party structures and taps into a wider demand for cleaner governance and fiscal discipline.

But Obi’s popularity also raises difficult coalition questions. Can a politician with genuine national momentum agree to play a subordinate role in a unity arrangement? Can rival blocs accept him as lead candidate? Can supporters who see him as a transformative figure embrace compromise for strategic reasons?

This is where opposition politics in Nigeria repeatedly encounters its greatest obstacle. Many leaders endorse unity in theory, but hesitate when unity demands sacrifice in practice.

Perhaps the most revealing aspect of Kwankwaso’s recent statement was the emphasis on legal uncertainty. He referenced court rulings, disputes over party legitimacy and fears that political platforms could be weakened through prolonged litigation. Whether one accepts that interpretation or not, the perception itself is politically significant.

In politics, uncertainty can be as damaging as defeat. If opposition actors begin to believe that party platforms are unstable or vulnerable, they will spend more time shopping for alternatives than building durable institutions. Time that should be used to mobilise voters gets consumed by legal consultations. Energy that should be spent presenting policy alternatives is diverted into internal survival battles.

While opposition figures debate platforms and personalities, the ruling All Progressives Congress quietly benefits from something often underestimated in Nigerian politics: structure. Incumbency provides access to nationwide networks, state-level influence, mobilisation machinery and the psychological confidence that comes with power.

The APC does not necessarily need the opposition to disappear. It only needs the opposition to remain divided.

That is why many analysts argue that the greatest ally of incumbency is not popularity, but fragmentation among rivals. If 2027 becomes a contest between one organised ruling machine and several competing opposition ambitions, the arithmetic naturally favours the government. If it becomes a disciplined one-on-one contest built around a credible coalition, the political equation changes considerably.

The decline of the PDP has made this moment even more significant. Once the dominant national platform for anti-government sentiment, the party now appears burdened by unresolved disputes, declining elite confidence and repeated internal turbulence. That vacuum created the opening for newer coalition experiments such as the ADC.

But replacing the PDP as a headline platform is easier than replacing it as an electoral structure. National parties are built ward by ward, polling unit by polling unit, not merely through high-profile defections and conference-room agreements. The opposition still lacks a clearly dominant institutional vehicle.

If opposition leaders are serious about challenging the APC in 2027, three urgent tasks stand before them. First, they must settle on a credible platform early and avoid endless migration between parties. Constant movement signals instability to voters. Second, they must resolve leadership questions through transparent negotiation rather than ego-driven public contests. Third, they must move beyond elite arithmetic and present a practical agenda on inflation, jobs, insecurity, electricity and governance reform.

Many Nigerians are frustrated with present realities. But frustration alone does not automatically translate into votes for the opposition. Citizens may desire change and still distrust the alternatives before them.

The latest Kwankwaso controversy is therefore not merely about one politician considering another party. It is about a deeper truth in Nigerian politics: opposition forces often agree on what they oppose, but struggle to agree on what they want to build.

That remains the central dilemma of 2027.

If unity prevails, the election could become genuinely competitive. If ambition prevails, the ruling party may receive another gift from its opponents—without having to ask for one.

Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu is a journalist and syndicate writer based in Abuja.

By Usman Muhammad Salihu

In politics, timing is everything; at the same time, timing alone is never enough.

The defection of Governor Bala Abdulkadir Mohammed (Kauran Bauchi) to the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) has continued to generate debate. With key loyalists reportedly moving with him, what initially appeared as a risky political leap is now being interpreted by some as a calculated repositioning.

But beneath the surface of strategy lies a more complex electoral reality, one that could ultimately decide whether this move succeeds or collapses. At the heart of the argument is the voter.

While Bauchi State has seen moments when lesser-known parties gained traction, particularly at the legislative level, where individuals have won seats in the State House of Assembly outside dominant party structures, statewide or nationwide politics operate on a far wider and more demanding scale.

The dynamics are different. The visibility is broader. The stakes are higher. And most importantly, party identity still carries significant weight.

At the level of electoral reality, however, the risks cannot be dismissed. Nigerian elections—especially at the governorship level—are still heavily influenced by party identity. Voters, particularly in rural strongholds, often associate credibility with established platforms rather than emerging ones.

In that sense, defecting to a less dominant structure, such as the Allied Peoples Movement, introduces an immediate disadvantage: the loss of automatic party loyalty.

Campaigning under such conditions creates a double burden. It is no longer just about selling a candidate—it is about introducing and legitimising a political platform simultaneously. That dual responsibility can stretch time, resources, and political influence thin, especially in a competitive race involving the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the emerging coalition around the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

From this view, the move carries a real risk of political isolation if voter perception does not align quickly enough with elite-level strategy.

Yet, it would be premature to interpret the move purely as risk. Nigerian political history also rewards early structural repositioning. Movements that eventually became influential often began as unpopular or misunderstood alignments.

In that context, Gov. Kaura’s move may be less about immediate electoral gain and more about long-term political architecture—building a platform where loyalty is personal, structure is controlled, and direction is defined internally rather than inherited from party hierarchies.

There is also a strategic possibility that this move is an attempt to build or shape a movement similar in political culture, if not in scale, to the Kwankwasiyya associated with Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, a structure rooted in identity, loyalty, and grassroots emotional connection rather than party stability alone.

If sustained, such a model can evolve into a political identity strong enough to survive beyond a single election cycle. But like all movements, it requires time, consistency, and deep voter penetration.

If the electorate does not understand or accept the new platform in time, the strategy weakens. If the structure grows slowly but steadily, the strategy strengthens. Either outcome is possible.

Because while elite political calculations move fast, voter acceptance does not. And in elections, voters, not strategy rooms, ultimately decide outcomes. So, is Gov. Kaura’s defection a political suicide or a stitch in time?

From one angle, it introduces clear electoral risks that cannot be ignored. From another, it suggests a longer-term ambition to build something more controlled and identity-driven. Both interpretations hold weight.

So whether this move is a masterstroke or a misstep remains uncertain. The calculations may be clear. The intentions may be bold. But in politics, certainty is a luxury.

For now, all eyes remain on the unfolding reality… because, in the end, time will tell.

Usman Muhammad Salihu writes from Jos, Nigeria, via muhammadu5363@gmail.com.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Professor Isa Ali Pantami, has disowned a controversial message shared on his Facebook page. He said the post, which described critics and non-supporters as hypocrites, did not have his approval.

In a statement issued on the same platform, Pantami explained that the content was published by one of the page administrators without his consent.

He said, “My attention has been drawn to a post on this page by one of the admins, containing a strongly worded message suggesting that anyone who does not support Prof. Pantami is a hypocrite, and that any cleric who does not support him is equally a hypocrite. I would like to state clearly that this message was not authorised by me, nor does it represent our approach to leading the affairs of our state. Furthermore, the admin in question has been placed under suspension until further notice.”

The former minister stressed that political engagement should allow room for differing opinions. He noted that respect for all individuals must be upheld, regardless of their views or affiliations.

Pantami also stated the importance of criticism in leadership and public discourse. He stated, “First, it is important to note that in politics, everyone is valued and respected, regardless of sectarian differences. Moreover, as an administrator, academic, former Minister, and, most importantly, a religious cleric myself, I understand the value of criticism. It is a vital ingredient that shapes discourse, upholds standards, and sustains development.”

He further reiterated his commitment to inclusive leadership, especially in a diverse society. According to him, “I would also like to state that, as a politician aspiring to lead a heterogeneous, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious society, I am for everyone. Islam equally enjoins every leader to be just to all, irrespective of differences, and I hold firmly to these values.”

Pantami added that his team reflects a mix of backgrounds and beliefs. He said, “It is also noteworthy to reiterate that my team comprises individuals of impeccable character from diverse ethno-religious backgrounds. It includes people of different faiths, both Christians and Muslims, as we understand that our diversity across many dimensions makes us stronger and greater as a people.”

He ended the statement with a brief note of appreciation to his supporters and followers.