As political activities ahead of the 2027 general elections continue to gather momentum, discussions around the use of consensus arrangements by political parties have intensified across several states.
Recent endorsements within major political parties, particularly the All Progressives Congress (APC), have generated fresh debate over the legality and democratic implications of adopting consensus candidates for governorship and other elective positions.
Although party leaders in some states have defended the process as a strategy to reduce internal crises and strengthen unity, some aspirants have openly opposed the endorsements, insisting that direct primaries remain the fairest option.
ENDORSEMENTS STIR INTERNAL PARTY DEBATES
In Lagos, Obafemi Hamzat has emerged as one of the most publicly endorsed governorship hopefuls within the APC ahead of the party’s primary election.
The deputy governor has reportedly secured backing from influential stakeholders, including members of the Governance Advisory Council (GAC), as well as support from Bola Tinubu and Babajide Sanwo-Olu.
Former Lagos governorship aspirants, including Akinwunmi Ambode and Abdul-Azeez Adediran, have also publicly aligned with Hamzat’s aspiration.
A similar development has unfolded in Ogun where APC stakeholders, led by Dapo Abiodun, endorsed Solomon Adeola as the party’s preferred governorship candidate.
In Oyo, APC leaders reportedly endorsed Sharafadeen Alli for the governorship race, though the move faced opposition from Adebayo Adelabu who rejected the arrangement.
The situation in Gombe also reflected internal disagreement after the APC announced Jamilu Gwamna as a consensus candidate.
The endorsement in Gombe was challenged by members of the Pantamiyya Movement, a support group loyal to Isa Pantami, who is also believed to be interested in the governorship contest.
ELECTORAL ACT RECOGNISES TWO METHODS
Nigeria’s Electoral Act 2026 outlines the approved procedures political parties may adopt when selecting candidates for elective offices.
Under Section 84(2) of the legislation, political parties are permitted to choose candidates either through direct primaries or through consensus arrangements.
The provision states that “the procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective positions shall be by direct primaries or consensus”.
The law equally mandates parties conducting direct primaries to comply fully with their internal guidelines and constitutional procedures.
CONDITIONS REQUIRED FOR CONSENSUS ARRANGEMENT
While the Electoral Act recognises consensus candidacy, the legislation also establishes strict conditions political parties must satisfy before such arrangements can become valid.
Section 87(1) of the Electoral Act provides that any political party adopting consensus must first obtain written approval from all cleared aspirants contesting for the same position.
The law states, “A political party that adopts a consensus candidate shall secure the written consent of all cleared aspirants for the position, indicating their voluntary withdrawal from the race and their endorsement of the consensus candidate.”
Under the provision, cleared aspirants refer to individuals who purchased nomination forms and successfully completed the party’s screening process.
The requirement means that no aspirant can legally be compelled to step down without personally consenting in writing to the consensus arrangement.
FAILURE TO SECURE CONSENT REQUIRES DIRECT PRIMARY
The Electoral Act further outlines what should happen if a political party fails to obtain the written approval of every cleared aspirant.
Section 87(2) states, “Where a political party is unable to secure the written consent of all cleared aspirants for the purpose of a consensus candidate, it shall revert to the choice of direct primaries for the nomination of candidates for the elective positions.”
The legislation also mandates that consensus decisions must still be formally ratified during a special convention or nomination congress conducted at designated centres.
Section 87(3) provides that “a special convention or nomination congress shall be held to ratify the choice of consensus candidates at designated centres at the National, State, Senatorial, Federal and State Constituencies.”
LAW ALSO LIMITS ARBITRARY DISQUALIFICATION
Beyond regulating consensus arrangements, the Electoral Act includes safeguards aimed at preventing political parties from introducing arbitrary disqualification conditions against aspirants.
Section 85 of the Act prohibits parties from imposing eligibility conditions outside those already recognised by the 1999 Constitution.
The section states that political parties “shall not impose nomination, qualification or disqualification criteria, measures, or conditions on any aspirant or candidate for any election in its constitution, guidelines, or rules for nomination of candidates for elections” except those recognised by constitutional provisions.
The constitutional conditions referenced in the law include age requirements, citizenship status, educational qualifications, criminal convictions, bankruptcy, certificate forgery and membership of secret cults.
As preparations for the 2027 elections continue, the debate surrounding consensus candidacy is expected to remain a major issue within party structures across the country.
