Danger of Weakening Opposition Parties

The internal crises within the main opposition parties, which have now hit the New Nigeria People’s Party reinforce public concern about Nigeria’s gradual descent into a one-party state that will restrict the choices of the electorate in future elections if not decisively tamed, Gboyega Akinsanmi writes

A fortnight ago, the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP), once an emerging alternative political platform, ran into a violent storm. Its leaders, especially at national and state levels, are now in disarray, inordinately scheming for control of the party structure rather than addressing the roots of their differences that are now jolting the party towards political oblivion.

Currently, the storm has bifurcated the NNPP into two warring factions. Each of the factions is taking decisions and counter-decisions to assert itself and clutch its levers of internal control. The first comprises nearly all members of the National Working Committee (NWC), who pledge allegiance to the 2023 presidential candidate, Dr. Rabiu Kwankwaso. The second is spearheaded by its Chairman of the Board of Trustees (BoT), Chief Boniface Aniebonam.

But the storm started raging when disagreement erupted between its National Secretary, Mr. Oladipupo Olayokun, and National Publicity Secretary, Dr. Agbo Major, both of whom were Aniebonam’s nominees. It became more complicated when the NWC dissolved and expelled its State Executive Committees (SECs) and State Working Committees (SWCs) first in Delta and Ogun States for alleged anti-party activities.

The NWC followed up with the dissolution of the SECs and SWCs in Borno, Ekiti, Enugu, Kaduna, Katsina, Kwara, Rivers, and Zamfara, a decision aimed at purging the party and repositioning it for future elections. The decisions compelled the affected executives to team up with Aniebonam to challenge their suspension and expulsion. They also claimed that the BoT, the party’s advisory organ, reserved the power to discipline them.

As the rift grew deeper, the NWC convened a session of its National Executive Committee (NEC) on August 29 to review the conduct of Aniebonam and his allies. At the session were Kano State Governor, Mr. Abba Yusuf; Speaker, Kano State House of Assembly, Hon. Jibrin Falgore; the NNPP National Leader, Alhaji Buba Galadima, and Abah-Kawu. In its resolution, the NEC accused Aniebonam and his allies “of sabotaging the NNPP; creating a parallel group within its ranks and causing disaffection among its members.”

Aggrieved by the decision of the NEC, Aniebonam immediately convened a meeting of the affected executives at the Rockview Hotels, Apapa, Lagos State. The faction then made some far-reaching decisions anchored to Article 12.3.4 of the Constitution of the NNPP, 2022, which empowers the BoT “to ensure the highest standards of morality in all the activities of the party and call to order any officer of the party whose conduct falls below the norms.”

Consistent with this article, Aniebonam’s faction suspended Kwankwaso for alleged involvement in anti-party activities and mismanagement of N1 billion in campaign funds. It equally suspended the NWC under its Acting National Chairman, Alhaji Abba Kawu-Alli obviously for similar allegations. Specifically, it defined Kwankwaso’s sins around the meetings he had been having with the leaders of major opposition parties.

The faction justified its decisions, citing different close-door sessions Kwankwaso had been having with President Bola Tinubu. It also claimed that he had been discussing the possibility of setting up an invincible political platform with the 2023 presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, and his Labour Party counterpart, Mr. Peter Obi.

For the BoT, having such unauthorised meetings with leaders of the major rival parties violated the Constitution of the NNPP, 2022, hence culminating in the award of a six-month suspension against Kwankwaso and his allies. Will the decision of the BoT stand? Does the BoT have such powers under Article 12.3 (g), which limits its function to offering advice on party matters to the NEC?

Like NNPP’s case, LP and PDP are embroiled in fierce internal crises, which according to analysts, have undermined their capacities to discharge the duties of a formidable opposition party in a democracy. In its instance, the Labour Party was almost torn apart between Mr. Julius Abure and Mr. Lamidi Apapa, contesting its national leadership in multiple court actions with some already resolved and others still pending.

The case of the PDP is no less deleterious and internally fractured since its first defeat in the 2015 presidential poll. Among diverse observers, its internal cohesion is a source of national concern. Likewise, its woes have become much more complex between October 2021 and June 2022 when its key leaders could not agree to a common zoning template for elective and national offices. This failure precipitated the PDP G-5 governors to work against Atiku’s candidature during the 2023 presidential election.

Analysts largely agreed that these intra-party conflict dynamics would undermine opposition parties from effectively playing their roles as an alternative government. Some ascribed crises within opposition parties to the handiwork of the APC without credible evidence. They claimed the APC planted moles in the opposition parties to foment crises in their ranks aimed at weakening them.

To justify this claim, they labelled Apapa as an agent of the APC paid to sow seeds of discord and dismemberment in the rank of LP’s national leaders. These analysts had earlier come up with an unsubstantiated claim that Tinubu funded Kwankwaso’s presidential campaign in the NNPP to further deplete the support base of the PDP. However, they never provided hard facts to back up their claims.

Other analysts argued differently. The opposition parties, they contended, are no doubt victims of a self-inflicted crisis deeply rooted in the irrational pursuit of political payoff among their power brokers without due regard to the provisions of their constitution. They justified this argument with a claim that Atiku’s 2023 presidential nomination did “not conform with the principles of power shift and power-sharing…” enshrined in the Preamble 2(d) of the Constitution of the PDP, 2014.

The aftermath of the contention viciously manifests in the waning influence of the opposition parties, which in concept exist to question government actions; present alternatives to government positions, and provide the option of an alternative government. Many analysts have argued that the foremost opposition parties have lost sight of their statutory functions.

However, the Director of Strategic Communications of the PDP Presidential Campaign Council, Chief Dele Momodu blamed the APC for the ailing conditions of the major opposition parties in an interview he granted in the 2023 general election. For him, APC is turning Nigeria into a one-party state. 

The Social Democratic Party (SDP) shared Momodu’s sentiment, which the APC claimed, lacked credible evidence to substantiate. However, these claims have been faulted because most opposition leaders are pursuing their political interests with little or no regard for the rules of the game. 

Consequently, as many analysts have observed, opposition leaders should look inward to resolve their internal rifts; ensure outright compliance with the provisions of their constitutions, and reposition their parties for serious contests in future elections. This suggests that it is not enough to blame their plight and woes on the ruling APC, which also manifests diverse internal conflicts that threaten its future.