Kaduna APC Primaries: Aspirants Reject Results, Allege Widespread Imposition and Constitutional Violations
In a dramatic escalation of internal party tensions, a coalition of All Progressives Congress (APC) aspirants vying for National Assembly tickets in Kaduna State has formally rejected the outcome of the party’s primary elections held on Saturday. The aspirants, operating under the banner of the Coalition of Kaduna Senatorial/House of Representatives Frontline Aspirants (CKEA), have accused the party leadership of orchestrating a deeply flawed process that they claim violates both the APC constitution and established nomination guidelines.
Background: The Stakes of the Primaries
Primary elections are the internal party contests where candidates are selected to represent the party in general elections. In Nigeria, these primaries are critical because they determine which individuals will carry the party’s flag into the National Assembly—the country’s legislative body comprising the Senate (109 members) and the House of Representatives (360 members). For the APC, maintaining internal cohesion during these primaries is essential for presenting a united front in the upcoming general elections. However, when aspirants perceive the process as rigged or imposed, it can lead to defections, voter apathy, and ultimately, electoral losses.
The Kaduna State APC primaries are particularly significant because Kaduna is a politically strategic state in Nigeria’s northwest region, with a diverse electorate and a history of competitive elections. The outcome of these primaries will shape the party’s chances in the general elections, making the allegations of irregularities especially damaging.
The Core Allegations: Imposition, Lack of Voting, and Constitutional Breaches
During a press briefing in Kaduna on Sunday, the coalition presented a protest letter addressed to the APC national leadership and other relevant authorities. The letter, signed by prominent aspirants including Yusuf Bala Ikara, Mohammed Mu’azu Makaddas, Yerima Usman Shettima, Yusuf Zailani, Sen. Danjuma Laah, Michael Ayuba Auta, Bashir Yusuf, Augustine Beguwa, Abdulazeez Abubakar Kaka, Yahaya Idris, and Sani Abdulkadir, detailed several specific grievances.
1. Imposition of Consensus Candidates Without Consent
The aspirants allege that the party leadership imposed “consensus” candidates without obtaining the mandatory written consent of all cleared aspirants, as required by Article 20 of the APC constitution. In party politics, a “consensus candidate” is typically agreed upon by all aspirants to avoid a divisive primary vote. However, the coalition claims that in this case, the consensus was forced, not negotiated. For example, in the Kaduna Central Senatorial District, the consensus committee—headed by Deputy Governor Dr. Hadiza Balarabe—attempted to impose former Senator Shehu Sani as the consensus candidate. Two frontline aspirants, former Speaker of the Kaduna State House of Assembly Yusuf Zailani and activist Yerima Shettima, publicly rejected this arrangement and demanded transparent primary elections.
Practical Example: Imagine a company where a manager selects a team leader without consulting the team members. Even if the chosen person is qualified, the lack of input breeds resentment and undermines trust. Similarly, in political parties, imposing a candidate without consent can fracture the party base and alienate supporters of other aspirants.
2. Absence of Democratic Voting
The coalition further claims that no proper primary elections were conducted in the three senatorial districts (Kaduna Central, Kaduna North, and Kaduna South). Instead, party members were denied the opportunity to vote for candidates of their choice. This is a serious allegation because direct primaries—where party members cast ballots—are a cornerstone of internal democracy. When voting is replaced by imposition, it disenfranchises party members and undermines the legitimacy of the chosen candidates.
Context: In many Nigerian political parties, primaries have historically been marred by violence, vote-buying, and manipulation. The APC’s own guidelines emphasize transparency and adherence to democratic principles, but the coalition argues that these guidelines were ignored in Kaduna State.
3. Alleged Involvement of the State Governor
The aspirants also allege that some committees handling the exercise claimed to be acting “under the directives of the Kaduna State Governor.” While the governor, as the party’s leader in the state, often has influence over party affairs, direct interference in the primary process can be seen as a conflict of interest. The coalition accuses the state APC executives of failing to address concerns raised about the conduct of the exercise, suggesting a systemic failure in oversight.
Impact on Party Unity and Electoral Performance
The aspirants described the primaries as “a complete sham” capable of undermining party unity and negatively affecting the APC’s performance in the forthcoming general elections. This is not an idle threat. When aspirants feel cheated, they may either run as independent candidates, defect to other parties, or simply withdraw their support—all of which can split the party’s vote base.
Historical Example: In the 2019 general elections, similar allegations of imposition in several states led to significant defections from the APC to other parties, costing the party seats in the National Assembly. The current situation in Kaduna could repeat this pattern if not addressed promptly.
Demands and Next Steps
The aggrieved aspirants have issued a clear set of demands to the APC national leadership:
- Nullify the consensus arrangements and the House of Representatives primaries conducted on May 16 in Kaduna State.
- Conduct fresh direct primary elections for all senatorial districts and House of Representatives constituencies, in line with the party’s constitution and guidelines.
- Act on their grievances within 48 hours to safeguard the integrity and unity of the APC.
The 48-hour ultimatum underscores the urgency of the situation. If the national leadership fails to respond, the coalition may escalate its protests, potentially involving the courts or the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which has the authority to monitor party primaries and reject candidates selected through flawed processes.
Broader Implications for Nigerian Democracy
This dispute is not just about Kaduna State; it reflects a broader challenge facing Nigerian political parties: the tension between internal democracy and the desire for control by party elites. When primaries are perceived as rigged, it erodes public trust in the electoral process and discourages citizen participation. For the APC, resolving this crisis transparently could set a positive precedent for other states, while ignoring it could embolden similar abuses elsewhere.
As the 48-hour deadline approaches, all eyes will be on the APC national leadership to see whether they will uphold the party’s constitution or allow the allegations to fester. The outcome will have lasting consequences for the party’s unity and its chances in the upcoming general elections.
[[PEAI_MEDIA_X]]
This article is based on reporting from the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN). For more information, read the original source article.