Do primary election results matter, or can party leadership override them?
Within the All Progressives Congress, a quiet but consequential rupture is forming around a question as old as organized politics itself: whether the voice of ordinary members carries weight when leadership has already made up its mind. In two Nigerian states — Kwara and Benue — candidates who won their primaries by commanding margins have been set aside in favor of incumbents who finished far behind, and the party's own stakeholders are now demanding, publicly and on record, that the results be honored. The dispute is not merely procedural; it touches on whether internal democracy within Nigeria's ruling party is a genuine practice or a performance staged for legitimacy.
- In Kwara State, Abolarin Ganiyu won his primary with 17,128 votes while the sitting lawmaker placed sixth with 2,978 — yet it is the incumbent's name that appeared on the official nomination form.
- In Benue State, Prof. Kohol Iornem crushed the field with 40,672 votes as the incumbent scraped together only 750, but INEC received a form bearing the incumbent's name nonetheless.
- APC chairmen, local council leaders, and grassroots members have broken from quiet deference, sending open letters and staging peaceful protests to force the national working committee to confront the contradiction.
- Party insiders are warning that overriding primary results does not just wound individual candidates — it signals to thousands of voters that their participation was meaningless, breeding the kind of resentment that fractures coalitions.
- The APC's national leadership now faces a narrowing window: reverse the selections and restore credibility, or hold the line and absorb the internal damage heading into the 2027 general elections.
A fracture is widening inside the All Progressives Congress over who will represent two federal constituencies in the 2027 general elections. The core dispute is straightforward: primary elections were held, winners were declared, and then different names — belonging to incumbents who lost badly — appeared on official nomination forms.
In Kwara State, Abolarin Ganiyu won the May 16 primary for the Ekiti/Irepodun/Isin/Oke-Ero Federal Constituency with 17,128 votes. The sitting lawmaker, Raheem Olawuyi, placed sixth with 2,978 votes. When the party announced its candidate, it was Olawuyi. Local APC chairmen from Ekiti and Oke-Ero councils have since sent an open letter to the national office, arguing that the decision not only ignores their members' votes but deepens what they describe as long-standing political marginalization of their areas. A party chieftain separately warned the national chairman that imposing Olawuyi risks real electoral damage.
The grievance in Benue State is sharper still. Prof. Kohol Iornem won the Kwande/Ushongu primary with 40,672 votes; incumbent Terseer Ugbor finished last with 750. Yet INEC received a nomination form with Ugbor's name. On Tuesday, APC members staged a peaceful protest, carrying signs and calling on the party's national working committee to honor what their members had decided.
What gives these disputes their weight is not simply that two candidates were passed over. It is that the party's own members are now publicly documenting the gap between primary results and official selections, putting the national leadership on notice. The APC has staked part of its identity on internal reform and democratic norms. These two states are now testing that claim — and the national working committee must decide whether to reverse course or absorb the disaffection that its own stakeholders warn could cost the party seats in 2027.
Inside the All Progressives Congress, a party fracture is widening over who will represent two federal constituencies in next year's general election. The dispute centers on a simple question: Do primary election results matter, or can party leadership override them?
In Kwara State, the conflict is stark. On May 16, 2026, party members voted in a primary election for the Ekiti/Irepodun/Isin/Oke-Ero Federal Constituency. The tallies were clear. Abolarin Ganiyu received 17,128 votes and finished first. Raheem Olawuyi, the sitting lawmaker, garnered 2,978 votes and placed sixth. Yet when the party announced its official candidate for the 2027 elections, Olawuyi's name appeared on the nomination form. Ganiyu's did not. Party leaders in the state have now sent an open letter to the national office demanding the decision be reversed, arguing that the outcome contradicts what their members chose.
The signatories include the APC chairman in Ekiti Local Council Area, Ajibola Ayoola; his counterpart in Oke-Ero, James Bamidele; and the chairmen of both local councils, Awelewa Olawale and Kayode Towoju. In their letter, titled "A passionate appeal to reconsider the APC choice of candidacy," they contend that bypassing the primary winner does more than ignore votes—it perpetuates what they describe as decades of political marginalization of the Ekiti and Oke-Ero areas. An APC chieftain named Adewale Waheed has separately warned the party's national chairman, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, that imposing Olawuyi could damage the party's electoral prospects.
The same pattern has emerged in Benue State, where the grievance runs even deeper. Prof. Kohol Iornem won the primary election for Kwande/Ushongu federal constituency with 40,672 votes, defeating five other candidates. The incumbent, Terseer Ugbor, finished last with only 750 votes. Yet the Independent National Electoral Commission received a nomination form bearing Ugbor's name. On Tuesday, APC members and affiliated groups staged a peaceful protest in Benue, with organizers including Ken Kaase and Aondolumun Ordorugh. They held signs and chanted, calling on the party's national working committee to honor the primary results and respect the democratic process that party members had participated in.
The protesters articulated a broader concern: that imposing a candidate against the wishes of the membership could fracture party unity, breed resentment among grassroots supporters, and weaken the APC's competitive position in both constituencies heading into 2027. The message was not angry but urgent—these are people who voted, who expected their votes to count, and who now fear the party is signaling that internal democracy is theater.
What makes these disputes significant is not merely that two candidates were passed over. It is that the party's own members are publicly challenging the national leadership, putting on record that the primary results and the final selections do not align. The APC has built its recent electoral success partly on claims of internal reform and respect for democratic norms. These disputes suggest that claim is being tested. The national working committee now faces a choice: acknowledge the primary results and reverse course, or defend the selections and risk the disaffection that party leaders themselves are warning could cost them seats in 2027.
Citas Notables
Imposing a candidate contrary to the wishes of party members could create disaffection, weaken party unity, and diminish electoral strength in the constituency— Benue APC protesters, including Ken Kaase and Aondolumun Ordorugh
The development could deepen political imbalance within the constituency and perpetuate decades of political marginalization of the Ekiti and Oke-Ero axis— Kwara APC stakeholders in open letter to party leadership
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why would a party leadership ignore the results of its own primary election? What's the incentive?
Sometimes it comes down to relationships and leverage. An incumbent has connections, has delivered resources, has favors owed. A primary winner might be less predictable, less aligned with the power structure. The party machinery can convince itself it knows better than the voters.
But doesn't that risk exactly what these protesters are warning about—fracturing the base?
Absolutely. And that's what makes this moment revealing. The party is betting it can absorb the anger, or that the anger won't translate into lost votes. But when you have local council chairmen and party officials signing open letters, you're not dealing with fringe complaints anymore.
Is there any way the national office can justify this?
They might argue the primary process was flawed, or that electability in the general election matters more than primary votes. But they haven't made that case publicly. They've just announced the different candidate and hoped it would hold.
What happens if they don't reverse course?
You get what the protesters predicted—members who feel cheated, who question whether their participation matters, who might sit out the general election or work less hard for the party. In a close race, that's the difference between winning and losing.
So this is really about whether internal democracy is real or just performance?
Exactly. And the answer the party gives in the next few weeks will tell members whether they should bother showing up to vote in primaries again.