Connect with us

News

Nigeria’s drift toward one-party dominance: Lessons from history and the specter of revolution

Published

on

 By Okey Okwusogu

In the evolving political landscape of Nigeria, concerns are mounting that the country may be inching toward a de facto one-party state under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration. Since his inauguration in May 2023, a wave of high-profile defections from opposition parties to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has reshaped the nation’s multiparty democracy. Governors from states like Delta, Enugu, Akwa Ibom, Rivers, Plateau, and Taraba have crossed over, swelling APC’s ranks to potentially 28 governors.

This trend, coupled with allegations of federal interference in opposition crises, has sparked debates about the erosion of political pluralism and the risks of authoritarian consolidation. While APC officials dismiss these claims as baseless, insisting there’s no plot to monopolize power, critics like former Vice President Atiku Abubakar warn of an “existential threat” to democracy, potentially leading to a civilian dictatorship.

This shift raises a critical question: If Nigeria solidifies into a one-party dominant system, could it face the kind of revolutionary upheaval or overthrow seen in other nations historically? Drawing from past examples of one-party states crumbling under popular pressure, this article explores the possibilities, weighing Nigeria’s unique context against global precedents.

Advertisement

 The Current Trajectory: From Multiparty Vibrancy to APC Hegemony?

 Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999 marked the end of military rule, ushering in a competitive multiparty system. However, under the current dispensation the terrain to some Nigerians is being viewed as opaque from an oblique perspective, the political arena appears increasingly lopsided to most critic.

Defections are often attributed to patronage, protection from investigations, or alignment ahead of the 2027 elections, rather than ideological shifts. For instance, Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s recent switch to APC followed intense political pressure, including suspensions and reinstatements, fueling accusations of intimidation. Similarly, Plateau Governor Caleb Mutfwang’s defection in early 2026 has been cited as evidence of a broader strategy to consolidate power.

Opposition figures argue this is not mere political maneuvering but a deliberate push toward one-party rule. Atiku has accused the administration of “shrinking democratic space” by weakening rivals like the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) through engineered internal conflicts. Even within the PDP, former chairman Umar Damagum alleged leadership’s camp was fueling divisions to pave the way for unchallenged dominance.Social media echoes these fears, with users warning that Nigeria risks becoming “a one-party system like Lagos under Tinubu’s long influence. “Proponents of this view point to past statements, including skepticism about “one Nigeria,” as indicators of a deeper agenda.

Yet, not all see doom. APC chieftains like Senator Magnus Abe counter that defections are voluntary and reflect effective governance, not coercion. They argue Nigeria is experiencing “dominant-party politics” rather than outright one-party rule, a phase seen in other democracies like South Africa under the ANC. Tinubu himself has publicly disavowed support for a one-party state, emphasizing democratic choice. Still, with economic hardships—rising inflation, fuel subsidies removal, and currency devaluation—exacerbating public discontent, the stage is set for potential unrest if opposition voices are further marginalized.

Advertisement

 Historical Precedents: When One-Party States Collapse

 History offers stark lessons on how entrenched one-party systems can unravel through revolutions or uprisings. The most salient examples come from the Revolutions of 1989 in Eastern Europe, where communist one-party regimes, backed by Soviet influence, fell amid economic stagnation and popular demands for freedom.

 In East Germany, the Socialist Unity Party’s monopoly crumbled under peaceful protests known as the Peaceful Revolution. Starting with small demonstrations in 1989, they swelled into millions, culminating in the Berlin Wall’s fall and reunification with West Germany. Key factors included economic decline, loss of legitimacy, and Gorbachev’s Soviet reforms withdrawing external support.

 Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution followed a similar non-violent path. Student-led protests and a general strike in November 1989 forced the Communist Party to cede power, installing dissident Václav Havel as president. Here, civil society mobilization and elite defections were pivotal.

 Romania’s case was bloodier: Widespread protests in December 1989 escalated into armed clashes, leading to the execution of dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu and the end of the Romanian Communist Party’s rule. Repression backfired, turning public anger into violent overthrow.

Advertisement

 Poland’s transition began earlier with the Solidarity movement in the 1980s, evolving into semi-free elections in 1989 that dismantled the Polish United Workers’ Party’s dominance. Economic crises and worker strikes eroded the regime’s base.

 Beyond communism, Portugal’s 1974 Carnation Revolution saw a military coup, backed by civilian protests, topple the authoritarian Estado Novo—a de facto one-party system under the National Union. Economic woes from colonial wars and public fatigue with repression fueled the change.

 These cases illustrate that one-party states are vulnerable when faced with economic hardship, loss of external backing, internal divisions, and sustained mobilization. Peaceful revolutions succeeded where civil society was organized, while violence erupted in more repressive contexts.

 Possibilities in Nigeria: Revolution or Resilient Dominance?

 Applying these lessons to Nigeria, the prospects of a revolution or overthrow hinge on several factors. First, economic distress mirrors the 1989 triggers: Tinubu’s reforms, while aimed at long-term stability, have inflicted immediate pain, with inflation soaring and poverty deepening. Past protests like #EndSARS in 2020 demonstrated Nigerians’ capacity for mass action against perceived injustices, potentially amplifying if one-party dominance stifles accountability.

Advertisement

 Second, opposition fragmentation could either prevent or provoke upheaval. If defections continue, reducing viable alternatives, it might lead to apathy or radicalization. Critics warn of a “Machiavellian approach” where Tinubu “pockets” politicians, but this could alienate the public if policies fail to deliver. A united opposition coalition, as suggested by some, involving figures like Atiku, Peter Obi, and Rabiu Kwankwaso under a neutral platform, might counter this—but disunity risks ceding ground.

Third, Nigeria’s diversity—ethnic, religious, and regional—complicates one-party consolidation. Unlike Eastern Europe’s homogeneous regimes, attempts to centralize power could ignite sectional tensions, as seen in warnings that “Nigeria is not Lagos. Historical military coups in Africa, like those in Sierra Leone or Gambia, often ended one-party eras, but Nigeria’s post-1999 stability suggests civilian uprisings or elite pacts are more likely.

However, revolution isn’t inevitable. Nigeria’s judiciary, media, and civil society remain robust, potentially checking excesses. If Tinubu’s administration delivers on infrastructure and security, dominance could endure without backlash, akin to long-ruling parties elsewhere. Yet, as one analyst notes, “a one-party system is the most dangerous” for democracy, risking complacency and corruption.

A Crossroads for Nigerian Democracy

Nigeria’s potential slide into one-party dominance under Tinubu evokes the fragility of systems like those in 1989 Eastern Europe. While peaceful revolutions there show people power can prevail, Nigeria’s context—marked by economic volatility and diverse interests—could either foster similar change or entrench the status quo. The key lies in whether public discontent translates into organized action or dissipates amid patronage. As history warns, ignoring these signs risks not just political monopoly, but the explosive unrest that follows. For now, the nation watches, hoping pluralism endures.

Advertisement

 *Okwusogu, an intelligence analyst wrote in from Abuja, Nigeria

Share this story:

News

Electoral Act: Don’t go to sleep, maintain eternal vigilance, ADC tells Nigerians

Published

on

“It demonstrates, in the clearest possible terms, that when citizens act with unity, clarity of purpose, and resolve, they can indeed move mountains.”

These were the exact words with which the African Democratic Congress (ADC), reacted to Tuesday’s agreement of the 10th Senate to reverse the controversial provisions in the Electoral Amendment Bill, in which they earlier retained the discretionary provision of transmission of results of election electronically by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Bolaji Abdullahi, spokesman of the coalition party, attributing the U-turn to the resilience of Nigerians, described the development as a victory for democracy and people-powered civic action.

Abdullahi, a former Minister, who called on Nigerians to stay alert and continue mounting pressure on relevant authorities until the amended bill secures presidential assent, is duly gazetted, and takes full legal effect, urged Nigerians to maintain eternal vigilance.

Advertisement

Following a groundswell of outrage across the country, regarding its initial decision to retain the 2022 provision and subsequent protests, which saw Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Labour Party in 2023 and Rotimi Amaechi, former Governor Rivers State, teaming up with a group of Nigerians on Monday and Tuesday, respectively, the Senate eventually bowed to pressure mandating the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to transmit elections to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), real time, but with a proviso to use manual collation only as a contingency in cases of technological failure.

Hailing the development, ADC stated that the recant by the lawmakers was beyond a simple legislative reversal, but a reflection of the resilience, alertness, and growing political awareness of Nigerians from all segments of society.

The statement, added: “The decision of the 10th Senate to urgently reverse the contentious provisions of the Electoral Amendment Bill that it passed is a significant victory for the Nigerian people.

“This outcome is not merely a legislative U-turn. It is a testament to the resilience, vigilance, and rising political consciousness of Nigerians across all walks of life. From street protests to digital campaigns, the Nigerian people have once again shown that sovereignty truly belongs to them.

“In the face of the ruling APC’s habitual disregard for due process and democratic values, the Nigerian people have reaffirmed their place as the ultimate custodians of our democracy.

Advertisement

“In this regard, the African Democratic Congress salutes the courage and tenacity of Nigerians. We commend every citizen who raised their voice, whether online or offline, to resist legislative mischief that threatened to undermine our electoral integrity.”

Calling on Nigerians to remain steadfast, stressing that the development represents only a step in the right direction, not the final victory, the party, added: “We must now ensure that this momentum is sustained until the amended bill is not only passed but duly assented to by the President, properly gazetted, and becomes an enforceable law of the Federal Republic.

“We must remain vigilant to ensure there are no last-minute betrayals or technical ambiguities, the kind that often lead to ‘stories that touch.’ Let this be a reminder that democracy does not thrive in silence or indifference. It demands participation, persistence, and sometimes, peaceful defiance.”

 

Advertisement
Share this story:
Continue Reading

News

This is the last time Tinubu will intervene in Rivers’ row – Wike  

Published

on

Nyesom Wike, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), on Tuesday, confirmed that President Bola Tinubu has once again intervened to stem the political schism between the Rivers State House of Assembly and Siminalayi Fubara, the governor that would have led to the latter’s impeachment.

But the Minister, left a caveat – this is the last time the President would be making such an intervention – as he added that both sides would now have to work according to the terms agreed at the parley.

In the latest faceoff which started early in the year, 27 members of the assembly said to be loyal to Wike, had launched a fresh impeachment move against the governor – the third since he took office in 2023, accusing him of sundry infractions of the constitution including spending money without appropriation.

Fubara, who defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC), last year, was believed to have run to the President for succour, whose intervention is believed to have halted the move.

Advertisement

Giving details of the rapprochement, Wike told reporters in Abuja, on Tuesday that the President playing a fatherly role stepped in to resolve disputes between the two parties.

His words: “He is very kind to the people of the state. If there seems to be any problem between the legislature and the governor, as a father, he really has to intervene.

“This is the second time Mr President is intervening and I believe by the grace of God that this will be the last time Mr President will intervene.”

Wike, who has since been linked to the crises from the outset and in firm grips of the lawmakers, also pointed out his own role in the matter, saying: “I have told them to obey Mr President and I know that they would not hesitate.”

Advertisement
Share this story:
Continue Reading

News

Tinubu finally sends Dakingari’s name to Senate after ambassadorial posting row

Published

on

President Bola Tinubu on Tuesday finally sent the name of Usman Isa Dakingari, former Governor of Kebbi State to the Senate for confirmation as as a non-career ambassador after last month’s embarrassing mix-up in which his name suddenly appeared for posting to Turkey without legislative clearance.

Tinubu, in a correspondence conveying the appointment, which was read by Godswill Akpabio, said: “I write for confirmation by the Senate, the appointment of Usman Isa Dakingari as non-career ambassador,.

“Whilst I hope that the senate will consider and confirm the nominee expeditiously, please accept, distinguished senate president, the assurances of my highest consideration.”

After reading the letter at plenary, the Senate President, said the matter would be referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs for consideration and report back to the Committee of Whole within one week.

Advertisement

Share this story:
Continue Reading

Trending