What should have marked the end of the All Progressives Congress (APC)’s candidate selection process has instead opened another chapter of political uncertainty. Across several states, aggrieved aspirants are rejecting the party’s final candidate lists, filing petitions, approaching the courts, demanding reviews and weighing their political options all of which could alter the electoral map as the 2027 polls draw closer, ADAMU ABUH reports.
As the ruling party prepares for the 2027 general election, its most formidable challenge may not come from a fragmented opposition but from within. Ordinarily, the submission of candidates’ names to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) signals the conclusion of months of consultations, negotiations, primary elections and appeals, allowing parties to shift their attention to campaigns. For the APC, however, the release of its final candidate lists has produced the opposite effect.
Rather than closing internal contests, the process has triggered fresh disputes in several states. Aspirants who believe they legitimately secured the party’s tickets are questioning the credibility of the nomination process, filing petitions, consulting lawyers and urging the party’s leadership to review decisions they consider unjust.
The scale of the controversy became evident after the primaries. Party sources said the APC received over 700 petitions challenging the conduct and outcome of its nationwide primaries. Following a review of reports submitted by the Primary Election Appeal Committees, the National Working Committee (NWC) led by the National Chairman, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda upheld many of the original results but also approved changes affecting candidates in several states before forwarding the final list to INEC.
Although the review was intended to address complaints and correct procedural irregularities, it generated fresh controversy in states where affected aspirants alleged that the exercise altered the outcome of duly conducted primaries. Among the states affected are Benue, Ondo, Kwara, Kaduna, Niger, Kogi, Taraba, Ebonyi and Abia. Party officials defended the exercise, insisting that the decisions complied with the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act and were necessary to correct genuine irregularities. However, some displeased members have shifted their complaints from the party secretariat to the courtroom while others have defected to opposition platforms.
In Benue State, for instance, Sesugh Akaagba and other aggrieved APC aspirants instituted Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1429/2026 before the Federal High Court in Abuja against the APC and INEC. The plaintiffs alleged that although they emerged from duly conducted primaries monitored by INEC, the party attempted to substitute their names before submitting its final list to the electoral commission. They are asking the court to compel the APC to recognise what they described as the authentic outcome of the primaries and restrain it from forwarding any altered list to INEC. The court subsequently directed all parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the suit.
The Benue dispute has attracted considerable attention because of the state’s growing political importance to the APC. Supporters of some affected aspirants questioned the basis for the substitutions and demanded greater transparency from the party’s national leadership. Political observers believe the outcome of the case could influence not only the fortunes of the affected aspirants, but also the party’s cohesion in one of its strategic strongholds
