The National Chairman of Nigeria’s ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has stated that the party’s constitution does not provide for automatic tickets for any aspirant, underscoring a renewed emphasis on internal democracy as political alignments begin to take shape ahead of future elections.
Speaking amid growing speculation over endorsements and incumbency advantages within the party, the chairman clarified that all aspirants—regardless of status—must emerge through established primary processes. “There is no provision for automatic tickets in our constitution. The party cannot promise such,” he said, reinforcing the principle that candidacy must be earned through due process.
The remarks come at a time when debates over internal party democracy and fairness have intensified within Nigeria’s political landscape. In previous election cycles, allegations of imposition and preferential treatment have triggered disputes, legal battles, and defections across major parties.
Political analysts say the statement signals an attempt by the APC leadership to project transparency and inclusivity, particularly as pressure mounts from party stakeholders seeking clarity on nomination procedures. “This is about managing expectations and preventing internal fractures,” said a Lagos-based political analyst. “Automatic tickets often create resentment among grassroots members who feel sidelined.”
Within the APC, some incumbents and influential figures have reportedly lobbied for guaranteed tickets to secure their political futures. However, the chairman’s stance suggests that the party leadership may be seeking to avoid controversies that could undermine cohesion.
Opposition parties have frequently criticised the APC and others for lacking internal democracy, arguing that opaque candidate selection processes weaken Nigeria’s broader democratic system. Civil society groups have also called for reforms to ensure that party primaries are credible, transparent, and reflective of members’ will.
Despite the chairman’s assurances, questions remain over how strictly these principles will be applied in practice. Past experiences have shown that party guidelines can be subject to interpretation, particularly in high-stakes contests involving powerful political actors.
