When mandates defect: How political cross-carpeting is stealing Nigerians’ votes

…Observers fear gale of defections will worsen voter apathy in 2027

At every election cycle, Nigerians are urged to believe that their votes are their voices. Ballots are cast with hope, long queues form under the sun, and citizens are assured that power ultimately lies with the people. Yet, once winners are sworn in, that voice often fades not through apathy or low turnout, but through the quiet, calculated movement of politicians from one party to another. In today’s Nigeria, mandates increasingly defect, even when voters do not.

Nigeria’s electoral framework makes this problem particularly acute. Citizens vote for political parties, not individuals. There is no provision for independent candidacy, compelling voters to align with party symbols, ideologies and platforms rather than personal ambitions. For years, this system shaped predictable voting patterns. Certain parties became embedded in specific regions, reflecting shared histories, identities and expectations. Voters believed that by choosing a party, they were choosing a direction. That understanding is now unraveling.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the South-South geopolitical zone. Once regarded as a stronghold of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) since the return to democracy in 1999, the region is today firmly under the control of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). This dramatic shift did not occur at the ballot box. It happened through defections.

While two of the six governors in the zone, Monday Okpebholo of Edo and Bassey Otu of Cross River, were elected on the platform of the APC, the remaining four; Umo Eno of Akwa Ibom, Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta, Douye Diri of Bayelsa and Siminalayi Fubara of Rivers, crossed over to the ruling party after securing their mandates on the PDP platform. In effect, millions of votes cast for one party were transferred to another without a single ballot being recast.

Across the country, this pattern has become routine, strategic and largely consequence-free. Governors, lawmakers and influential party figures routinely abandon the platforms on which they were elected, carrying their mandates with them into rival parties. Often, this happens within months of an election. The electorate, whose votes conferred legitimacy in the first place, are neither consulted nor considered.

Read also: Amidst Atiku and Obi in ADC, Tinubu retains significant structural advantage ahead 2027 — A data‑driven assessment

The result is a steady erosion of the meaning of electoral choice. In communities where party loyalty once reflected collective aspirations, defections now render voting patterns irrelevant. A people may overwhelmingly endorse an opposition party, only to wake up to governance under the banner of the ruling party because of a single political calculation. What began as a democratic decision ends as a political ambush.

The consequences go far beyond party labels. Defections have shifted power away from polling units, the supposed heartbeat of Nigeria’s democracy, to party headquarters, political godfathers and the machinery of state. Elections increasingly reward proximity to power rather than popularity with voters.

While the minds of defected governors, lawmakers and others are in their new parties, the minds of their people are elsewhere. This signals that voting next time could be through coercion or greeted by high voter apathy.

Compounding the problem is the failure of the legal system to act decisively. While the Constitution contains provisions meant to discourage defections, enforcement has been inconsistent and, at times, blatantly selective. Court cases linger for years, technicalities overshadow substance, and judgments often arrive long after political damage has been done. By the time legal clarity emerges, the defector has either secured re-election on a new platform or negotiated another political safe landing.

Ironically, the Constitution already provides a framework to address defections within the legislative arm. Section 68(1)(g) and 109(1)(g) mandates that a member of the National Assembly and a House of Assembly must vacate their seat if they defect to another political party before the expiration of their term. Yet, this safeguard is weakened by Section 109(2)(g), which allows defections where “satisfactory evidence” of a division within the party is presented. This loophole has been repeatedly exploited to justify cross-carpeting without consequences, entrenching a culture of political opportunism.

There are, however, signs of growing unease within the system. The House of Representatives Committee on Constitution Review is currently considering amendments to the 1999 Constitution aimed at tightening the rules on the removal of the president, vice president, governors and deputy governors, particularly in cases of defection. The proposed bill seeks to amend Sections 143 and 188 to clearly define actions and omissions that would constitute gross misconduct, including defection to another party without credible evidence of a crisis in the original party, making affected office holders liable to removal by the National Assembly or State Houses of Assembly.

Still, until reforms move from proposal to practice, accountability remains inverted. Instead of elected officials answering to voters, voters are forced to adjust to the whims of elected officials. Decision-making power drifts from polling units to backroom negotiations and elite consensus-building. Ordinary citizens are reduced to spectators in a process that once promised participation and choice.

Read also: Year of defections, real and imaginary hunger, and political abracadabra

Unsurprisingly, voter apathy is on the rise. Many Nigerians increasingly question the value of voting when their choices can be casually overridden. When ballots no longer guarantee representation, participation begins to feel like a ritual without reward. Democracy becomes procedural rather than substantive.

The crisis raises uncomfortable but urgent questions. Should Nigeria continue to prohibit independent candidacy, tying voters permanently to unstable party structures? Should defectors be compelled to seek fresh mandates through by-elections? And can electoral and judicial institutions be strengthened to protect the sanctity of the ballot?

Until these questions are answered, Nigeria risks entrenching a system where votes are borrowed, traded and abandoned at will.

Taofeek Oyedokun is a correspondent at BusinessDay with years of experience reporting on political economy, public policy, migration, environment/climate change, and social justice. A graduate of Political Science from the University of Lagos, he has also earned multiple professional certificates in journalism and media-related training. Known for his clear, data-driven reporting, Oyedokun covers a wide range of national and international socioeconomic issues, bringing depth, balance, and public-interest focus to his work.

Join BusinessDay whatsapp Channel, to stay up to date