Connect with us

Nigeria

ANALYSIS: Direct Primaries for Political Parties May Be A Step Towards 1993 Electoral Model

Published

on

Last week, the National Assembly passed the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, making it compulsory for all political parties to conduct their primaries using the direct method.

Direct electoral method is not new to Nigeria, and in fact, it has been said to have been adopted in the most credible election in Nigeria, which is the 1993 election.

According to African Election Database, Moshood Abiola of the then Social Democratic Party (SDP) garnered a total vote of 8,341,309 making 58.36% while Bashir Tofa of the defunct National Republican Convention (NRC) garnered a total vote of 5,952,087 making 41.64% of the election results.

Despite the alleged irregularities by the then military government led by Ibrahim Babangida, electoral observers at the national and international levels had posited that the election was the most credible election Nigeria ever had.

The model was also tested in the Lagos State Chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship primary in 2018. The primary actually halted the second-term ambition of the then governor Akinwumi Ambode in the state.

Although one of the current challenges facing electoral process in Nigeria is vote-buying but direct electoral method will in the long run build electoral loyalty towards the party or candidate any electorate swore allegiance to in the secret. It may further dissuade electorate from collecting money from politicians if they know they’ll not vote for them.

Direct primary at the party level will also serve as popularity test for anyone contesting at the party level, such as we have seen in the case of former governor Ambode of Lagos in 2018.

Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo had said last week that many of the National Assembly members believed the best way for them to win re-election was by the direct primary method, which would not be easily manipulated by their state governors.

“The reason (for the endorsement of direct primaries by the National Assembly) as it emerged from our discussions at the tripartite committee was that some legislators felt that party congresses had been completely taken over by state governments, and other legislators, as stakeholders, stood no chance of a fair contest in the primaries if all potential delegates and actors have already been spoken for,” Osinbajo said.

INEC Duties Expanded

No doubt, the introduction of direct primaries at the political parties will expand the responsibility of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

On November 15, the Commission was reported to have said that it may be forced to use serving members of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) to monitor direct primaries of political parties across the country if President Muhammadu Buhari signs the Electoral Act Amendment Bill into law.

The electoral umpire maintained that this is due to a large number of personnel that will be needed to monitor the direct primaries across the 8,809 wards in the 36 states of the country and the Federal Capital Territory.

This was disclosed by the INEC National Commissioner and Chairman, Information and Voter Education Committee, Festus Okoye, in a chat with journalists.

Okoye added that it would be premature to speculate since the President had not yet signed the bill, adding that certain factors would be considered.

He admitted that the staff requirements for primaries would “change if the President assents to the bill.”

The INEC spokesman said some political parties might consider conducting primaries at the ward level, while others might use the local governments or senatorial districts as the criteria for primaries

Responding to a question, Okoye said, “Some parties may adopt the 8,809 registration areas (wards) of the commission for their primaries. Some may use the 774 LGAs for their primaries. Some may cluster their primaries around the senatorial districts.

“Some may use the state capitals and have a differential period when people from a particular local government area can vote. These things will be set out in the guidelines that will be designed by the parties and filed with the commission at least 14 days before the conduct of the primaries.

“When the bill is signed into law, the commission will meet and take a position on how to proceed with each strand and segment of the process. We may use our staff members for some of the primaries. We may use lecturers of federal tertiary institutions for some. We may use staff members of federal agencies and commissions, and we may use corps members. It depends on the tract designed and submitted by the parties.”

The commission, according to its 2019 project plan, hired about 2.7 million ad hoc officials for the general elections, many of whom were corps members.

The document showed that N630m was spent on monitoring political party congresses and primaries in 2018. About N104.8m was spent on monitoring governorship, senatorial, state constituency and federal constituency primaries, while the presidential primary cost N27.8m.

Criticism and Countered Criticism

The Peoples Democratic Party and the governors of the All Progressives Congress have rejected the provision for direct primaries, while the National Assembly remains adamant.

The bill is expected to be transmitted to Buhari this week for assent upon his return from South Africa. However, governors have begun making moves to ensure that he does not sign it.

But the House of Representatives and some senators have threatened to veto the President if he fails to sign the bill within 30 days.

Also, political parties under the aegis of the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), have again kicked against the use of direct primaries

The National Publicity Secretary of IPAC, Major Agbo, said that it could affect smaller parties, which did not have the finances.

He said, “The passage of the Electoral Act due to pressure from the electorate is a welcome development. The wishes and aspirations of Nigerians prevailed at last even though they tried to scuttle it initially.

“However, the inclusion of the clause on direct primaries is meant to stifle smaller parties without resources. The resources required to mobilise all party members for the primaries are enormous and will effectively put the smaller parties in difficulty, especially as the parties do not receive any funding from the government as tenable in other climes.

“This is not healthy for our democracy as it gives undue advantage to the bigger parties at the expense of the smaller ones. Nigerians should insist that this clause be removed before the bill is assented to.”

 

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Books

‘My Life of Duty and Allegiance’ —An Elder Statesman’s Version of the Truth

Published

on

  • Book Title: My Life of Duty and Allegiance
  • Author: Yakubu Gowon
  • Publishers: Continuity Books.
  • Reviewer: Dr Emeaba O. Emeaba
  • Pages: 881

When a military ruler who presided over a nation’s most catastrophic civil war waits until his tenth decade to publish his memoirs, the reader expects either a profound exercise in grand self-justification or an unburdening of the conscience. In My Life of Duty and Allegiance, General Yakubu Gowon—who assumed power in Nigeria in 1966 at the astonishingly raw age of 31—attempts to give us both. What emerges across 881 densely packed pages is a deeply complex, often moving, yet fundamentally contradictory document: the work of an elder statesman striving to polish his historical legacy, even as his own words repeatedly fracture the varnish.

Gowon’s narrative arc follows a classic post-independence path. Raised in Daura and Wusasa by Christian missionary parents, he traces his early life with an endearing warmth, detailing his rapid ascent through Sandhurst and the Royal Military Academy into the elite officer corps of a newly independent Nigeria. But the heart of the volume, inevitably, is the thirty-month Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970), born of the widespread anti-Igbo pogroms that drove a traumatized populace back to the Eastern Region, where secession was declared not out of mere political ambition, but as a desperate, last-stand effort to protect a people facing systemic annihilation—and the turbulent decade of military rule that surrounded it.

To his credit, Gowon writes with an understated dignity that sets his work apart from the bombastic memoirs typical of West Africa’s mid-century military junta leaders. He paints himself not as a tyrant, but as a reluctant servant of statehood—a devout Christian officer forced by tragedy and duty to hold a fracturing federation together at all costs. His reflections on the post-war reconciliation era, anchored by his famous post-conflict decree of “No victor, no vanquished,” radiate a genuine desire to present himself as a noble unifier.

Yet, for all its graceful prose and pious framing, the memoir’s historical value lies less in what it succeeds in proving than in where it visibly falters under critical scrutiny. For historians and careful readers alike, My Life of Duty and Allegiance contains profound textual and factual fractures—moments where the author’s defensive manoeuvring unwittingly conflicts with established records and even his own narrative logic.

Consider Gowon’s account of the chaotic July 29, 1966 counter-coup that brought him to power. Seeking to distance himself from the brutal assassination of his predecessor, General Aguiyi-Ironsi, Gowon writes of an impulsive attempt to save the Supreme Commander by phoning the Ikeja airport to order a rescue helicopter under “Major Paul Dickson.” It is a dramatic, noble story—except that military archives establish there was no officer by that name in the armed forces; the only Paul Dickson present was an Air Force staff sergeant tasked with sentry duty. More damaging still is the author’s silence regarding documented transcripts from that very afternoon, in which he authorized the arrest of Ironsi by rebellious officers, famously pausing before asking, “Can you do it?”

This habit of offering personal alibis in place of historical accountability recurs at key junctures. Addressing the collapse of the crucial January 1967 Aburi Accord in Ghana—the peace agreement that represented the last diplomatic exit ramp before full-scale war—Gowon attributes his acquiescence to a “shivering fever,” claiming he was too ill upon returning to Lagos to make sound decisions. Yet audio recordings of the conference reveal a lucid, composed negotiator. The subsequent dismantling of the accord via Decree No. 8 was not the by-product of malaria, but a calculated political retreat orchestrated under heavy pressure from senior federal bureaucrats and military advisers who feared a loss of centralized revenue and power.

Perhaps most unsettling is the book’s arithmetic of tragedy. In describing the devastating human toll of the civil war—where federal blockades and famine devastated the civilian population—Gowon routinely reduces the casualties to “thousands who perished.” To reduce a conflict in which an estimated one to two million Biafran non-combatants died of starvation and military action to a mere “thousand” is not simply an exercise in semantic gobbledygook; it is an attempt to rewrite the scale of a national catastrophe.

When the text turns to post-war governance, the contradictions deepen. Gowon presents his fiscal policies and the post-war “Three Rs” (Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Reconciliation) as gestures of generous magnanimity. Yet he glosses over the brutal reality of the federal policy that awarded a flat sum of just £20 to returning Easterners regardless of their prior bank balances, alongside the controversial Abandoned Properties Act. To reconcile such economic penalization with the high-minded rhetoric of “No victor, no vanquished” requires a degree of cognitive dissonance that the memoir simply cannot sustain.

Similarly, Gowon defends his 1974 decision to indefinitely postpone the transition to civilian rule—a betrayal of his own promises that directly prompted his overthrow in 1975—by citing the political unreadiness of the nation. It is the classic, self-serving paradox of the military autocrat: claiming the nation is too fragile for democracy after nearly a decade of absolute military control without constructing the very institutions necessary to support it.

The performative nature of the memoir’s publication was further underscored at its public launch in Abuja, where General Theophilus Danjuma—the key officer behind the July 1966 operation against Ironsi that vaulted Gowon to supreme power—served as the event’s primary benefactor, donating a staggering ₦3 billion to the project. For critics, the spectacle was less an act of literary patronage than a symbolic closing of ranks among the war’s chief beneficiaries. That a former career officer whose vast post-military fortune stems not from industrial enterprise, manufacturing, or commercial risk, but from lucrative state-awarded discretionary oil concessions, could single-handedly underwrite the celebration of the regime’s official story speaks volumes. It highlights a troubling continuation of the “spoils of war”—a political economy where the wealth and historical narrative of the state remain firmly concentrated in the hands of the very men who reshaped it by force.

My Life of Duty and Allegiance remains an indispensable primary source. It offers an intimate, highly readable window into the mind of a leader who stood at the absolute epicentre of modern Africa’s most traumatic conflict. But readers seeking a candid historical accounting will be disappointed. General Gowon has given us an evidence of faith, duty, and deliberate selective memory. In trying so painstakingly to defend his record, the aging commander has inadvertently provided the very evidence that destabilizes his official history.

_________

♦ Dr. Emeaba, the author of “A Dictionary of Literature,” writes dime novels in the style of the Onitsha Market Literature sub-genre.

Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Can Nigerian Voters Replicate America’s Midterm Electoral Revolt?

Published

on

“Nigeria does not merely need a voters’ revolt. It needs an electoral revolution.” —Dr. Anthony Obi Ogbo

Over the past few days, I have been reflecting on America’s historic midterm elections and reading various analyses of the remarkable voter revolt against the political establishment. American voters demonstrated their willingness to punish political failure at the ballot box. But can Nigerians similarly defeat entrenched power when the very institutions entrusted with protecting their votes remain vulnerable to political interference?

America’s November 3 midterm elections delivered a devastating political verdict. Voters, frustrated by rising living costs, the Iran war, and growing dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump’s leadership, handed Democrats control of both chambers of Congress. Republican strongholds fell, political loyalties shifted, and voters demonstrated that incumbency is no insurance against public anger.

The message was unmistakable: when governance fails, the electorate can withdraw its mandate. But across Nigeria, the American revolt has inspired a provocative question: Can Nigerians replicate this electoral uprising in the 2027 presidential election?

The comparison is compelling, but the institutional realities are profoundly different.

Nigeria has no shortage of reasons for electoral rebellion. Economic hardship, persistent inflation, unemployment, deteriorating purchasing power, insecurity, and widespread distrust of government have created a deeply frustrated population. From kidnapping and rural banditry to failing infrastructure and declining public confidence, the country’s governance challenges demand serious political accountability.

Yet frustration alone does not remove a government. Elections do. And therein lies Nigeria’s democratic predicament.

In the United States, elections are administered through decentralized state and local institutions operating under federal and state laws. Election officials, courts, observers, and established legal procedures provide multiple layers of accountability. The system is imperfect, frequently litigated, and vulnerable to partisan disputes. Nevertheless, its decentralized structure makes nationwide electoral manipulation by a single executive authority considerably more difficult.

Nigeria operates differently. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is constitutionally established as an independent institution. However, its chairman and national commissioners are appointed by the president, subject to Senate confirmation. This arrangement creates legitimate concerns about institutional autonomy, particularly when the appointing authority belongs to a political party contesting the elections.

Nigeria’s electoral history reinforces these concerns. The controversial 2007 presidential election exposed serious weaknesses in electoral administration. In 2015, however, Nigerians demonstrated that incumbency could be defeated when Goodluck Jonathan lost to Muhammadu Buhari. That historic transition remains powerful evidence that peaceful electoral change is possible.

But the 2023 presidential election again exposed institutional distrust. Disputes over electronic result transmission, transparency, and electoral procedures eventually reached the Supreme Court, which upheld President Bola Tinubu’s victory.

Courts are constitutionally empowered to resolve election disputes. The problem is not judicial involvement itself, but the perception that electoral outcomes increasingly depend on litigation rather than the unquestioned credibility of votes cast.

When citizens begin to believe that ballots are merely preliminary documents awaiting judicial interpretation, democracy suffers a dangerous credibility crisis.

Equally troubling is the protection of votes. INEC administers federal elections, while the Nigeria Police Force and other security agencies provide electoral security. These institutions operate within a centralized federal framework, raising concerns about executive influence over personnel, deployment, and operational independence.

How, then, can Nigerians stage an American-style electoral revolt when the institutions protecting their votes are themselves subjects of public suspicion? The answer requires more than opposition slogans, social media outrage, or massive political rallies.

First, Nigeria must constitutionally reform INEC’s appointment process. An independent, multipartisan selection mechanism, transparent public hearings, protected tenure, and guaranteed funding would reduce executive influence and strengthen electoral credibility.

Second, judicial independence must become nonnegotiable. Transparent appointments, financial autonomy, enforceable ethical standards, and expedited election petitions are essential. Courts must remain impartial arbiters, not become perceived substitutes for the electorate.

Third, electronic transmission and public verification of polling-unit results must become legally enforceable safeguards, supported by independent audits and meaningful penalties for manipulation.

Fourth, election security must be operationally insulated from partisan directives. Electoral offenses, including intimidation, ballot destruction, and result falsification, must attract swift and credible prosecution.

Voters must organize beyond ethnic loyalty

Finally, voters must organize beyond ethnic loyalty, religious sentiment, and online activism. They must register, mobilize, monitor polling units, document irregularities, and protect their electoral mandate through lawful civic participation. The ultimate tragedy of Nigerian democracy is not that citizens lack the courage to reject failed leadership. It is that they cannot consistently trust the machinery entrusted with translating their rejection into political change.

America’s midterms demonstrated the power of electoral accountability. Nigeria’s 2027 elections must confront a more fundamental question: whether the ballot remains stronger than the political establishment.

A democracy becomes a dangerous deception when citizens are permitted to vote but cannot confidently determine who wins. Nigeria does not merely need a voters’ revolt. It needs an electoral revolution in which institutions become stronger than incumbents, ballots become stronger than political influence, and the people’s verdict becomes stronger than the machinery of power.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Continue Reading

Education

Professor Josephine Onyido Earns Prestigious Nigerian Academy of Education Induction

Published

on

University of Port Harcourt scholar will be inducted into Nigeria’s apex education academy in Abuja, marking another milestone in a career spanning teaching, research, leadership, mentorship and advocacy

HOUSTON, TEXAS — Professor Josephine Azuka Onyido, an accomplished scholar and academic leader at the University of Port Harcourt, will be inducted into the Nigerian Academy of Education on Wednesday, November 4, 2026, in recognition of her contributions to the advancement of education.

The ceremony, scheduled for the Conference Hall of the National Commission for Colleges of Education in Abuja, places Onyido among scholars recognized for sustained contributions to education, research, and academic development in Nigeria.

A Professor in the Department of Educational Foundations at the University of Port Harcourt, Onyido has built a career encompassing teaching, research, administration, mentorship, curriculum development, and institutional service.

She described the forthcoming recognition as both an honor and a renewed obligation to education. “I receive this recognition with profound gratitude and humility. My journey in education has always been driven by the belief that scholarship must extend beyond the classroom and contribute meaningfully to society. This induction is not simply a personal achievement; it strengthens my responsibility to continue advancing quality education, mentoring future scholars, and promoting opportunities for women and girls. I am deeply grateful to my family, colleagues, students, and everyone who has been part of this journey.”

Onyido earned a Bachelor of Arts in Education (English), a Master of Education, and a Ph.D. in Sociology of Education. She is also a permanent member of the University of Port Harcourt Senate. Her scholarly record includes more than 90 journal articles, book chapters and Sociology of Education Made Easy, a textbook developed to make concepts in the discipline more accessible to students.

Much of her research examines the intersection of education and society, with particular emphasis on gender, women’s empowerment, educational development, social justice and the rights of women and girls. Her work advocates translating academic research into policies and practices that expand educational opportunities and strengthen human-capital development.

Beyond research, Onyido has occupied several academic leadership positions. She served as Acting Head of the Department of Educational Foundations from 2021 to 2023 and has worked as the Departmental Coordinator of Postgraduate Programs, the Anti-Plagiarism Coordinator, the Academic Adviser, and the Editor of the Port Harcourt Journal of Education Studies.

Her influence also extends beyond her university. She has served as an external examiner for several institutions and has participated as a resource person for the National Teachers’ Institute, the University of Port Harcourt, the Centers for Higher Education and Sandwich Programs, and the National Universities Commission verification exercise.

Internationally, Onyido represented the Niger Delta Development Commission at the African Women in Leadership Conference in Kigali, Rwanda, expanding her engagement with issues of women’s leadership, empowerment, and social transformation.

She belongs to several professional organizations, including the Teachers Registration Council of Nigeria, the Association of Sociologists of Education of Nigeria, and the International Association for Gender Equity.

Her academic and community work have earned numerous recognitions, including the Millennium Development Ambassador Award, Lecturer of the Year, Outstanding Project Supervisor, and Professional Service awards.

Yet Onyido’s story also reaches deeply into heritage and service. She is the great-great-granddaughter of King Josiah Constance Ockiya, MINGI VII, Amanyanabo of Nembe Kingdom and Supreme King of Brass. Her great-grandfather, Rev. Daniel Ockiya, translated the Bible into the Nembe language.

A committed Catholic and Jerusalem pilgrim, she has also served in church and community leadership positions and was recognized by the Catholic Women Organization of the Port Harcourt Diocese as a “Quintessential Woman.”

For Onyido, the November 4 induction represents more than another distinction on an extensive academic résumé. It recognizes a career built around an enduring principle: education achieves its greatest value when knowledge is transformed into opportunity, service, and social progress.

Continue Reading

Trending