Nigeria’s opposition parties are facing a deep credibility crisis, raising questions about the strength of democratic competition in the country.
In an opinion piece, Kabiru Danladi Lawanti argues that opposition politics in Nigeria has weakened significantly since 2015, when the People’s Democratic Party lost control of the federal government after sixteen years in power.
According to the writer, the PDP has struggled to rebuild its influence since leaving power. Internal divisions and leadership disputes have weakened the party’s ability to function as a strong opposition force.
Read Also: Generative AI and Academic Writing: A Scholar’s Perspective
During its years in government, the PDP controlled a large majority of Nigerian states. At one point, it held power in more than 30 states while opposition parties governed only a few.
Today, the balance of power has shifted. The All Progressives Congress dominates Nigeria’s political landscape and controls most state governments.
Other parties hold far fewer states. The Labour Party, All Progressives Grand Alliance, and smaller political groups control only a limited number of states.
The writer suggests that political influence in Nigeria often depends more on access to state resources than on ideology or policy ideas.
According to him, parties tend to appear strong when they control government funds and administrative structures.
Once out of power, many struggle to maintain unity and organisational strength.
The current imbalance in political power has led to debate about whether Nigeria could drift toward a one-party system.
However, the article argues that the situation reflects a deeper problem. Instead of strong ideological parties, Nigerian politics often revolves around elite networks that use different party platforms to contest elections.
The writer concludes that meaningful political change will depend largely on citizens.
He argues that voters must demand accountability from elected officials regardless of party affiliation.
According to him, democracy can only function when leaders are challenged on governance performance and when voters refuse to reward poor leadership at the polls.
