NDC’s four-year southern zoning gamble: A recipe for distrust and opposition failure, By Chukwuemerie Uduchukwu
Citizens across the federation have witnessed enough recycled tactics to recognise when political manoeuvring prioritises short-term expediency over genuine nation building.
Citizens across the federation have witnessed enough recycled tactics to recognise when political manoeuvring prioritises short-term expediency over genuine nation building. The notion of restricting a presidential ticket to a single region for just one term flies in the face of Nigeria’s progress beyond ethnic and regional arithmetic in high-stakes contests. Nigerians have grown past the level of such contrived arrangements that treat the presidency as a rotational trophy…
Nigeria stands at a critical juncture in its democratic journey, where political actors must demonstrate maturity and strategic foresight rather than resort to gimmicks that undermine public confidence. The recent declaration by the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) to zone its 2027 presidential ticket exclusively to the South for a mere four years, represents one such misstep that demands rigorous scrutiny. This decision not only defies the spirit of inclusive leadership but also raises fundamental questions about the party’s understanding of constitutional provisions and the evolving expectations of the Nigerian electorate.
Citizens across the federation have witnessed enough recycled tactics to recognise when political manoeuvring prioritises short-term expediency over genuine nation building. The notion of restricting a presidential ticket to a single region for just one term flies in the face of Nigeria’s progress beyond ethnic and regional arithmetic in high-stakes contests. Nigerians have grown past the level of such contrived arrangements that treat the presidency as a rotational trophy, rather than a position earned through competence, vision and broad appeal. The electorate demands leaders who can unify a diverse nation, rather than those packaged through zonal formulas designed to placate narrow interests.
Unless this zoning serves as a veiled mechanism to position former President Goodluck Jonathan as the candidate, the entire proposal collapses under its own weight of absurdity. Jonathan remains the only prominent figure who might face constitutional limitations tied to prior service, having already occupied the office. For any other aspirant, this four-year cap lacks legal or logical grounding and exposes the party to accusations of playing games with the aspirations of millions. The 1999 Constitution clearly authorises every eligible Nigerian citizen to contest for the presidency with the potential to serve a maximum of two four-year terms, subject to electoral victory and adherence to due process. This framework establishes a level playing field in which ambition aligns with national interest, rather than predetermined timelines or regional quotas.
It is, therefore, ridiculous for the NDC to expect citizens to accept its strange and funny declaration at face value. Such a move not only insults the intelligence of voters but also sows seeds of deeper distrust within the party’s own ranks and among potential supporters. Internal cohesion suffers when members perceive leadership as engaging in opaque deals, rather than transparent merit-based selection. If the arrangement was crafted exclusively for Jonathan, then the party should state so openly instead of hiding behind regional zoning rhetoric that confuses observers and alienates those who value constitutional fidelity above all.
This episode highlights a broader malaise afflicting segments of the opposition terrain. The haste with which ungrounded politicians have defected to the NDC despite lingering uncertainties surrounding the party’s legal standing, reveals a troubling preference for quick fixes over institutional strength. Rather than investing time and resources in forging a reliable opposition capable of sustaining political agendas across multiple electoral cycles, many actors appear driven by immediate personal calculations. This migration pattern weakens the democratic fabric by encouraging opportunism at the expense of ideological consistency. A truly robust opposition requires deep roots in communities, clear policy alternatives, and unwavering commitment to democratic norms. Jumping ship to a nascent entity mired in legal questions does little to advance accountability or provide voters with credible choices in future polls.
The NDC’s zoning declaration exemplifies how anxiety to establish relevance can lead to pronouncements that alienate rather than attract. When parties chase visibility through controversial edicts, they erode their own credibility and diminish the opposition’s collective capacity to check executive excesses. Nigerians deserve an opposition that prioritises competence and national cohesion over parochial deals. Urging improvement is not mere criticism but a call to elevate discourse and practice.
Compounding these concerns is the procedural irregularity evident in the party’s activities. One must wonder about the legality of conducting a national convention, without verifiable records of foundational grassroots exercises including local government, state, and zonal congresses. Democratic parties thrive on layered structures that ensure representation from the ward level upward. Bypassing these essential steps risks violating internal democratic principles and invites legal challenges that could further destabilise the organisation. Without transparent documentation of lower-tier congresses, the convention’s outcomes stand on shaky ground, potentially rendering decisions vulnerable to nullification. This shortcut approach contradicts the patience and meticulous planning required for any political movement seeking longevity and legitimacy.
Nigeria’s political history offers instructive lessons on successful opposition building. The coalition that eventually formed the All Progressives Congress demonstrated strategic patience by engaging in prolonged negotiations, forging alliances across regions and ideologies, and methodically addressing structural requirements before challenging for power. Their deliberate process culminated in the historic 2015 transition, marking a significant milestone in the country’s democratic evolution. In contrast, contemporary opposition efforts that prioritise speed over substance risk repeating cycles of fragmentation and failure. The NDC and similar groups cannot mature into formidable forces if they neglect these foundational practices. Imbibing patience means investing in membership mobilisation, policy development, and compliance with electoral laws before seeking the spotlight.
