Nigerian politics has recently undergone a dramatic transformation, a wave of defections from opposition parties to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has altered the county’s power dynamics. This wave of defections by governors and lawmakers from parties including the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Labour Party (LP), and the New Nigerian People’s Party (NNPP) has sparked mixed reactions across states, with Nigerians divided over whether the country is drifting towards a one-party state. The defections have helped the APC expand its influence across the country, with the party celebrating its dominance by posting “31/36” on its official X handle. This happened after the recent defection of the Zamfara state governor, Dauda Lawal, from PDP to APC. 31 out of Nigeria’s 36 state governors now belong to the APC – and the party seems to be confident that it can win over the remaining five.
These defections have revived a controversial remark by an APC Senator, Adams Oshiomole, who, during a 2019 party rally welcomed PDP defectors with the words: “Once you join the APC, your sins are forgiven.” That comment is relevant today as a defining metaphor for Nigeria’s political reality. The notion that defection to the ruling party translates to political absolution, while being in the opposition exposes one to investigation and prosecution, is dangerous.
The decline of the Nigerian opposition parties is not shocking. When politicians are not grounded in any ideology, they only go where their personal interests lie. Those who have defected from the PDP include, Governors Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State, Umo Eno of Akwa Ibom, Douye Diri of Bayelsa, Agbu Kefas of Taraba, Ahmadu Fintiri of Adamawa, Caleb Muftwang of Plateau, Siminalayi Fubara of Rivers, Dauda Lawal of Zamfara, and Peter Mbah of Enugu, while Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf of Kano State also left the NNPP to join the APC in January.
Where It All Began
To understand how shallow Nigerian politics has become, we must look at where it all began from. Pioneers of Nigerian nationalism clearly articulated their beliefs and ideologies, and the parties they led and were part of were extensions of those convictions.
The National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC), formed in 1944, and the Action Group (AG), established in 1951 by Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe and Chief Obafemi Awolowo respectively, were in fact driven by ideology.
Azikiwe was a Pan-Africanist and Marxist whose “Zikism” sought total decolonisation of the African mind. The ideology had five canons: spiritual balance, social regeneration, economic determinism, mental emancipation, and political resurgence.
Awolowo embraced democratic socialism. His four cardinal principles were free education, free medical services, integrated rural development, and full employment.
Then there was Mallam Aminu Kano, who dedicated his life to fighting for the talakawa (poor people). He founded the Northern Elements Progressive Union (NEPU) in 1950 and campaigned for “freedom, liberty, and justice” for the ordinary people of Northern Nigeria.
These were not merely slogans, they were principles that politicians embraced. Citizens knew what their leaders believed in and gave their support to whoever made the most sense to them. Nigerians voted for NCNC because they believed in Pan-African unity and social engineering. You voted AG because you wanted schools, hospitals, and rural development. People voted NEPU because they were poor and Aminu Kano was the only one who truly saw them.
Today, Nigerian political parties are a vehicle for access, not ideas or beliefs. They do not bring people together who share values, they function as platforms for the political elite to maximise their interests. They join the party when it can give them something–contracts, appointments or protection–then they defect to another party when it no longer serves them. This is why we keep seeing the same faces in different parties over different election cycles in Nigeria.
Former media aide to Atiku Abubakar, former vice president, David Bwala, was one of President Tinubu’s harshest critics, he was also vocal against the antics of the APC before the 2023 elections. His criticisms were harsh and personal as he constantly questioned President Tinubu’s health and fitness for office.
In a turn of events, Bwala joined the Tinubu camp as a presidential spokesperson in November 2024, and suddenly, he became one of this administration’s most enthusiastic commentators.
Recently, he appeared on Al Jazeera’s ’Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hassan. In this disgraceful public appearance, he sought to defend the Tinubu administration and set the record straight, however, it was nothing short of a shameful , poorly planned showing on his part. This supports the argument that he did not choose to serve Tinubu’s administration because he suddenly believed in its policies, but rather because it aligned with his vested interests.
Nigeria spent 29 of the 39 years between independence in 1960 and the return to democracy in 1999 under military government. Every time a civilian government was gaining momentum, developing party structures, and cultivating ideology, the military seized power.
Military rule was characterised by intimidation, the absence of free speech, and disregard for civil rights and the rule of law. Citizens learned to stay quiet or find ways to benefit from proximity to power. Survival skills under military rule required the exact skills that have since defined Nigerian political culture: patronage, bigotry, and self preservation.
Another factor that may have caused the decline of political ideology is oil. Oil revenue significantly changed the relationship between Nigeria and its citizens. In a country where the government derives most of its income from oil wealth rather than from taxing citizens, politicians do not need to persuade citizens or even answer to them.
Nigeria’s political culture does not only come from its politicians, it also comes from the expectations, or a lack of them, of the citizens. The collapse of public education has played a role that is not discussed enough. Nigeria has consistently allocated well below the UNESCO-recommended 15-20 percent of its national budget to education. In 2025, education accounted for only 7.3 percent of Nigeria’s national budget. The strong, rigorous educational culture that existed with Nigeria’s older generations is less prevalent today. There is a lack of intellectual culture that good education made possible. .
Nigeria’s basic education framework has remained largely unchanged for decades. It has rewarded memorisation and regurgitation of theory more than anything else, leaving students ill-equipped for critical thinking or anything resembling intellectual curiosity. Public schools are in terrible condition, with students sometimes not even having chairs, tables, computers, whiteboards, and even ceilings.
The result of this shows up in examination halls. Last year, almost 80 percent of the nearly two million candidates who took the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME), popularly known as JAMB, scored below half the full mark of 400. This was not an anomaly. In 2024, 76 percent of candidates scored below 200 in the exam. In 2021, it was 87.2 percent, yet instead of raising the bar JAMB continues to reduce its cut off mark.
Universities also carry their own dysfunction. According to the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), between 1999 and 2020, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), went on strike for a total of 1,450 days. Under the Buhari administration alone, students lost 13 months of schooling to ASUU strikes. For many students, those months are lost to idleness at home while seeing the many ways that the government does not prioritise their education.
In Northern Nigeria, UNICEF estimates that 18.5 million children were out of school as of late 2024. The majority of out-of-school children are concentrated in the north, where the Almajiri system has persisted as a societal ill that has been allowed to grow for decades. It’s estimated that there are about 10 million Almajiris wandering about with no formal education, no exposure to civic reasoning, and no knowledge of politics beyond how it can get them their next meal. They have no economic footing that might give them any confidence to demand accountability from anyone.
The neglect of this group of people, mostly young male children, works in favour of the political elite. Despite living in abject poverty, illiteracy, and social alienation, they are available when politicians need to mobilise votes or intimidate opposition.
Southern Nigeria also deals with its own unique problem. The recruitment of gangs for electoral purposes has a long history in Nigerian politics. Criminal groups are hired to intimidate voters. Where the North has weaponised poverty and educational exclusion, the South has also weaponised young men who, most likely have an education, but have also been dragged into a life of thuggery.
Nigerians cannot build an accountable democracy with an ill equipped electorate. An electorate that has been poorly educated, has never been taught to interrogate what political parties actually stand for, that has grown up watching adults navigate politics through patronage, violence and personal interest rather than principle and ideology, cannot demand more from its leaders.
Tribalism and money have filled the ideological vacuum. Parties are poorly rooted within any ideological framework and cannot mobilise supporters on the basis of intelligent ideas, so they fall back on ethnic bigotry.
