By Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye, SAN
Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu
The daily torch media.
The recent launch of Governor Seyi Makinde’s presidential campaign office in Abuja has drawn attention to a significant development in Nigeria’s evolving opposition politics ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Makinde, who is seeking the presidency on the platform of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), attracted prominent political figures from outside his party to the event, including former Anambra State Governor and presidential candidate Peter Obi, as well as former Niger State Governor, Dr Aliyu Babangida, a prominent figure within the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
Their presence was significant because it appeared to challenge the rigid partisan boundaries that have traditionally characterised Nigeria’s electoral politics.
For decades, Nigerian politics has been marked by intense party rivalry, ethnic and regional calculations, mutual suspicion and, at times, a winner-takes-all approach to political competition. Against this background, the presence of politicians from different political platforms at a presidential campaign office launch points to a possible shift towards greater inter-party engagement and strategic cooperation.
The development also raises an important question: can opposition parties cooperate without necessarily merging, and what does Nigerian law permit them to do?
From Partisan Rivalry to Strategic Cooperation
Presidential campaign launches have traditionally been highly partisan affairs, designed to demonstrate party strength, consolidate support and reinforce internal discipline.
Politicians associated with rival parties rarely shared such platforms. Where they did, their actions could be interpreted by party loyalists as evidence of disloyalty or what is commonly described in Nigerian political language as “anti-party activity”.
However, the appearance of opposition figures at Makinde’s campaign office inauguration suggests that political actors may increasingly be willing to distinguish political competition from personal hostility.
Rather than allowing early disagreements among opposition groups to weaken their collective challenge to the ruling party, the emerging approach appears to favour dialogue, mutual respect and cooperation on issues of common national concern.
Obi, during the event, reportedly emphasised that belonging to different political parties does not necessarily make politicians enemies. The more important consideration, he suggested, should be how political leaders can collectively address issues such as hunger, poverty and insecurity.
That approach represents a potentially important departure from the confrontational style that has characterised some previous election cycles.
The One-Party State Concern
A major factor behind the emerging opposition realignment is concern over the growing political strength of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
Opposition politicians across different platforms have repeatedly raised concerns about the possibility of Nigeria gradually moving towards a de facto one-party system if opposition forces remain fragmented.
The emerging alliances therefore appear to be driven not only by individual political ambitions but also by a broader calculation about political survival and the preservation of Nigeria’s multiparty democracy.
Initiatives and political conversations around a possible “Reset Nigeria” agenda have further fuelled discussions about cooperation among opposition groups.
Such cooperation could allow political parties to retain their separate identities, structures and grassroots organisations while working together on broader objectives, including respect for the rule of law, electoral transparency, effective resource management and governance reform.
Lessons from Nigeria’s Political History
The current realignment is not without historical precedent.
Nigeria’s political history contains several examples of political parties and groups forming alliances or coalitions when electoral circumstances demanded cooperation.
During the First Republic, the Northern People’s Congress (NPC) and the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) formed a coalition government.
Similar cooperation emerged during the Second Republic, while the political realignment that preceded the formation of the All Progressives Congress in 2013 represented one of the most consequential examples of opposition consolidation in Nigeria’s recent history.
The APC emerged from the merger of major opposition political parties and groups, including the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), alongside a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). The New Peoples Democratic Party (nPDP), a faction of the then-ruling PDP comprising serving governors and other political figures, subsequently joined the realignment.
The lesson from these developments is clear: Nigerian political actors have repeatedly confronted the tension between individual ambition, party identity and the broader need for collective political survival.
De Jure Merger or De Facto Alliance?
The most important question, however, is the legal distinction between a formal political merger and an informal political alliance.
A de jure merger involves the formal and legally recognised integration of political parties into a single political organisation. By contrast, a de facto alliance allows separately registered political parties and their members to cooperate politically while retaining their distinct legal identities.
This distinction is crucial because Nigeria’s electoral framework does not provide for two separate registered political parties to jointly nominate one candidate on a shared presidential ticket.
A candidate must be sponsored by a registered political party in accordance with the electoral laws.
Consequently, opposition parties seeking to challenge the ruling party in 2027 face a strategic choice. They may pursue a formal merger and create a single legal political entity, or they may retain their separate identities and cooperate politically while each operates within the boundaries of the law.
The Electoral Law and Political Realignment
The Electoral Act also imposes important procedural requirements on political parties, particularly regarding mergers, membership registration and the conduct of party primaries.
These legal requirements mean that political negotiations cannot be treated solely as political calculations. Any proposed realignment must also comply with statutory deadlines and the procedures established by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The distinction between political cooperation and legal merger therefore becomes particularly important as the 2027 election approaches.
If opposition parties ultimately decide that a formal merger is necessary, they will have to complete the required legal and administrative processes within the prescribed electoral timetable.
If, on the other hand, they opt for an informal alliance, each party will continue to operate as a separate legal entity and must comply independently with the applicable rules on membership, primaries, nominations and candidate sponsorship.
The law, therefore, places clear limits on how far political alliances can go without becoming a formal merger.
A New Chapter in Opposition Politics?
The presence of prominent politicians from different political platforms at Makinde’s campaign office launch may ultimately prove to be more than a symbolic gesture.
It could represent the beginning of a broader evolution in Nigeria’s opposition politics—one in which political competition is increasingly separated from political hostility.
Whether the emerging cooperation can survive the difficult questions of presidential ambition, candidate selection, party structures and ideological differences remains uncertain.
Ultimately, however, the development highlights an important reality: Nigeria’s opposition parties may have to find new ways of cooperating if they are to remain electorally competitive in 2027.
The future of Nigeria’s multiparty democracy may therefore depend not only on what happens within individual political parties, but also on what political actors are able to build between them.
