One-Party State is Loading in Nigeria: True or False?

Magnus Onyibe

As a student, I was often intrigued by open-ended examination questions such as “No Nile, No Egypt. Discuss.” Such questions demanded analytical reasoning grounded in historical facts. That early fascination inspired the title of this intervention: “One-Party State Is Loading in Nigeria: True or False?”

Any assessment of Nigeria’s democracy must acknowledge one reality: political bias inevitably shapes judgement. Thus, the question of whether Nigeria is sliding into a one-party state is often answered emotionally rather than empirically.

Those who argue that the danger is real point to the massive defections from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Nigeria’s former ruling party. Once dominant between 1999 and 2015, the PDP today resembles a political patient in intensive care. It has been hemorrhaging governors and leaders, unable to heal internal fractures despite repeated reconciliation efforts since its defeat by the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2015.

The party’s recent national convention in Ibadan, intended as a reset, may yet prove pyrrhic. Deep factionalisation, parallel conventions, and ongoing legal battles—particularly involving the rival faction led by Nyesom Wike, former Rivers State governor, and current FCT minister—have crisis rather than resolved it.

In contrast, the ruling APC appears politically stable, making comparisons between the two parties akin to juxtaposing ancient Athens—the birthplace of democracy—with modern-day Washington, DC.

It is particularly disappointing that the PDP, which midwifed Nigeria’s return to multiparty democracy in 1999 after years of military rule, governed for 16 years before collapsing into opposition disarray. A decade on, the party remains trapped in a deep malaise.

This dysfunction largely explains the growing wave of defections to the APC, a trend that is fast becoming the norm.

The Labour Party (LP), which surged to national prominence through Peter Obi’s impressive third-place finish in the 2023 presidential election, is not immune either. Internal democracy deficits and allegations of financial impropriety have plunged the party into factional strife, mirroring the PDP’s troubles.

Against this backdrop, fears that Nigeria may be drifting towards a one-party state are understandable. Politicians in failing opposition parties are quick to sound the alarm—whether out of genuine concern or political self-preservation.

But the critical question remains: Does the weakness of opposition parties necessarily mean the death of democracy in Nigeria?

This dysfunction explains the growing wave of defections to the APC, a trend increasingly interpreted as evidence that Nigeria is sliding towards one-party rule. But that conclusion is far from settled.

Contradicting this narrative is another school of thought that holds that a one-party state is not “loading” in Nigeria. Despite the avalanche of defections to the APC, countervailing movements suggest a reconfiguration—not a collapse—of opposition politics.

For instance, Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke has reportedly defected to the Accord Party, a platform once considered near moribund. More significantly, key PDP founding figures—including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and former Senate President David Mark—along with thousands of party members, have migrated to the revitalised African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Politics is inherently dynamic. In this case, the ADC appears to have been politically “acquired” by heavyweight defectors from the PDP—unlike the formal merger that birthed the APC in 2013. The ADC has made no pretence about its ambition to challenge the APC for control of Aso Rock in 2027 and has already embarked on an aggressive membership drive, ahead of the APC’s planned convention in March 2026.

Waziri Adamawa, Atiku Abubakar’s recent formal entry into the ADC at a rally in Jada, Adamawa State, underscores the party’s renewed momentum. Meanwhile, Peter Obi—widely assumed to be aligned with the ADC—has yet to formally declare, suggesting strategic caution rather than political irrelevance.

Beyond the ADC, Nigeria’s political map further weakens the one-party thesis. In Kano State, the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), led by Dr. Musa Kwankwaso and powered by the Kwankwasiyya movement, remains firmly in control.

In Anambra State, Governor Chukwuma Soludo of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) secured a landslide re-election victory in November, defeating the APC candidate by over 400,000 votes—clear evidence that APGA, not the APC, rules the roost.

Similarly, in Abia State, Governor Alex Otti of the Labour Party (LP) has sustained multiparty vibrancy through performance-driven governance. While internal party disputes pose challenges, LP’s control of Abia further undermines claims of an APC monopoly.

Taken together, these realities raise a critical question: how can Nigeria be described as descending into a one-party state when LP, APGA, NNPP, ADC, Accord, and even the weakened PDP still control states, mobilise voters, and credibly compete for power?

The decline of the PDP—once Nigeria’s dominant ruling party—should not be conflated with the collapse of democracy itself. Parties rise and fall; democracy survives through competition, not permanently. What Nigeria appears to be experiencing is not a one-party state but a phase of dominant-party politics.

Dominance, however, is not the same as monopoly. As long as opposition parties win elections, govern states, and challenge for national power, Nigeria—however imperfectly—remains a multiparty democracy.

At this juncture, it is pertinent to share with readers how the post below shared with me by a senior member of the commentariat prompted this analogical intervention.

The following is the data that was shared:

PDP: The Journey to Single-Digit States

Ruling Party Trajectory

1999 — Presidency & 22 states

2003 — Presidency & 26 States

2007 — Presidency & 29 States

2011 — Presidency & 25 States

2015 — 13 States

2019 — 16 States

2023 — 13 States

2025 — 6 States

The Six States:

• Adamawa

• Bauchi

• Oyo

• Plateau

• Taraba

• Zamfara

It is astonishing that since the above statistics were generated, the PDP has further shrunk in its ranks from six (6) states to three (3), as Plateau, Taraba, and Adamawa have also fallen under the spell of the APC. This development has occurred as the ruling party—now going beyond a conventional political organisation—has effectively morphed into a movement, enabling it to roll over formerly opposition-controlled states.

Consequently, the leadership of the remaining three PDP-controlled states is now in a quandary over how to withstand the ferocity of the ruling APC while remaining within an increasingly weakened and handicapped PDP.

Being naturally inquisitive, I chose to look beneath the surface of the data, ignoring the drumbeats and celebratory dances of those alleging that Nigeria is descending into a one-party state simply because the PDP is now in the ICU and seemingly in the throes of death.

By stripping away the noise and focusing on reality, one can discern that during the current political cycle, three nearly moribund parties—LP, ADC, and Accord—have been resuscitated, while a new party, the NNPP, has emerged within the same political dispensation. So, the diminishing fortunes of the PDP do not equate to the imminent death of democracy, as some would have us believe.

History is instructive in validating this assertion. Empires rise and fall—an inevitable reality. Greece, once the cradle of democracy, is today but a shadow of its former self. Britain, which once ruled nearly three-quarters of the world—from Africa to India, the Caribbean, Canada, Australia, and even the United States—has since contracted into England, Ireland, and Wales, collectively known as the United Kingdom.

Therefore, while it is understandable to mourn the decline of the former ruling party, PDP, it is disingenuous to portray its internal crisis—now leaving it in control of only three states—as evidence that Nigeria’s over 25 years of continuous multiparty democracy is degenerating into a one-party state.

Incidentally, Nigeria has witnessed a similar political scenario in the past, as highlighted by the socio-economic and political analysis firm Statisense. During the era when the PDP was the ruling party, particularly under President Olusegun Obasanjo’s second term between 2003 and 2007, the party controlled all the South-east and South-south states and most of the South-west and north central as well as a bit of north east and west, with Lagos State as the lone exception.

Subsequently, following court rulings that nullified several elections, the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), which had lost the South-west to the PDP, strategically plotted its return to national relevance by merging with three and a half other opposition parties to form the APC in 2013. This coalition enabled the APC to reclaim lost ground and eventually seize power.

Today, it is remarkable that the APC—owing largely to the organisational skills of President Bola Tinubu—has reinvented itself from controlling only Lagos State in 2007, to becoming the ruling party in all but six of Nigeria’s 36 states as 2025 draws to a close.

At this juncture, it bears reiterating that if a one-party state were ever to emerge in Nigeria, it would reflect Tinubu’s political dexterity as a seasoned strategist—and, conversely, the failure of opposition party leaders to inspire committed followership due to weak internal democracy within their platforms, including the PDP, LP, SDP, and ADC.

The argument that Tinubu is secretly funding the undertakers of opposition parties currently exhibiting signs of terminal illness is both lame and untenable.

In politics, opposition parties routinely deploy all available tactics—demarketing, blackmail, intimidation, and deception—to outwit rivals. A classic example was Senator Bukola Saraki’s emergence as Senate President against the wishes of then-President Muhammadu Buhari. Through political manoeuvring, Saraki outsmarted party leaders(diverting hostile senators away from the chambers while the loyal ones remained to vote in his favor) and thus secured the position as senate president against the plan of the leadership of his party but with support from dissident APC senators and opposition PDP lawmakers. That episode was realpolitik at its finest.

This reality underpins the popular saying that politics is a dirty game—a negative but globally entrenched label, with Nigeria being no exception.

Given this context, political parties worthy of the name should protect their flanks, much like households secure their homes against intruders. Instead of ensuring internal cohesion, opposition parties facing self-inflicted implosions have chosen to blame the APC and Tinubu for their misfortune.

For instance, the PDP’s crisis deepened in 2023 when the party violated its zoning principle by shifting the presidential ticket northward, producing Atiku Abubakar as its candidate instead of rotating power to the South-East. In protest, Peter Obi—Atiku’s former running mate in 2019—defected to the Labour Party, becoming its presidential flagbearer.

That political divorce resulted in Obi and the LP sweeping votes across the South and East to finish third, with 6,101,533, while PDP and Atiku secured a distant second place with 6,984,530 votes, largely from parts of the North, as Tinubu and APC garnered 8,794,726 in the 2023 presidential election.

If opposition leaders in the PDP failed to consolidate their gains from 2019, lacked foresight, and could not forge a united front in 2023—ultimately losing to Tinubu—why should anyone else be blamed for their misfortune?

President Tinubu, by contrast, demonstrated political sagacity by persuading rival contenders to step down during the APC primaries and by patiently building a national coalition over several years before winning the presidency.

Given this level of diligence and strategic effort, how can the failures of Nigeria’s opposition parties—now metaphorically sleepwalking into oblivion—be blamed on Tinubu or the APC?

Interestingly, in states such as Osun in the South and Zamfara in the North, the APC has reportedly rebuffed overtures from incumbent PDP governors seeking to defect, confident in its organisational strength and electoral machinery. Rather than accommodating distressed politicians, the party has chosen to block their entry.

In the past, it was fashionable to accuse the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of coercing governors into defecting. That line of argument has now become obsolete, as no credible evidence supports such claims in the current dispensation.

The advice to opposition parties, especially the PDP, therefore, is simple: end the blame game and address internal vulnerabilities. Political parties hemorrhaging their top members—particularly governors—must confront their self-inflicted wounds.

As a precautionary note to the APC, however, its current dominance should not be mistaken for a fait accompli. The party must remember the aphorisms: uneasy lies the head that wears the crown and what goes up must come down.

The road ahead will be rough if the APC fails to consolidate economic reforms and translate improving macroeconomic indicators into tangible relief for ordinary Nigerians. Reduced petrol prices must meaningfully reflect in lower transport costs, less expensive food prices, affordable housing, and good healthcare—critical components of daily life.

At this juncture in Nigeria’s history, public messaging by the leadership should emphasise patience and hope, acknowledging the inevitable lag between policy implementation and real-world impact.

In other words, APC must strive to convince weary Nigerians that joy is coming.

Although the implosion of the APC was once predicted due to its formation from ideologically diverse parties in 2013—strange bedfellows by any measure—it has instead grown stronger, much to the consternation of its adversaries.

But by the simple rule of life, every society or firm goes through boom and bust. The PDP is going through that motion. Indeed the longevity of an entity or society is dependent on the dexterity of the leaders in managing success.

APC has thrived well as it has been enjoying a boom period stretching over the past ten years.

It must be remembered that leadership can be tenous if it fails to be inclusive and responsive to the yearnings of members of the society.

In the case of political parties, if internal democracy is not enforced by way of inclusion of critical stakeholders, and in situations whereby the opposition parties fail to play their critical of keeping the ruling party in check, civil society/liberty organizations such as YlAGA Africa, Enough-Is-Enough, SERAP, CISLAC, etc that abound in Nigeria can step in by holding the feet of our political leaders to the fire.

In the final analysis, the prospect of Nigeria descending into one party is not to worry about as the system has the capacity to self-correct course.

President Tinubu and his team, given their wide political experience would likely not lead our country into such cul-de-sac because it would not even serve their best interest if by chance they wanted to be selfish.

• Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, an alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, a Commonwealth Institute scholar, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos