By Fr. Maurice Kwairanga
May 16, 2026
Nigeria’s 2026 party primaries have sparked a sharp national debate over the meaning and misuse of consensus candidacy. Although the Electoral Act 2026 defines consensus as a voluntary agreement among all aspirants, critics argue that the practice unfolding today is anything but voluntary.
Section 84 of the Nigerian Electoral Act 2026 is about Nomination of candidates by parties. It provides as follows:
(1) A political party seeking to nominate candidates for elections under this Act shall hold primaries for aspirants to all elective positions which shall be monitored
by the Commission.
(2) The procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the
various elective positions shall be by direct primaries or consensus.
Instead of reflecting genuine unity, the so‑called consensus is widely viewed as an elite‑driven arrangement executed by party cabals. Aspirants often “agree” under pressure, while grassroots party members—empowered on paper by the new Act—are sidelined in practice.
Analysts warn that this version of consensus functions as a mechanism for candidate imposition, allowing political godfathers to handpick loyalists and bypass competitive primaries. The result is a widening gap between the law’s democratic intent and the political reality on the ground.
As the question “Who’s consensus?” continues to echo across the political landscape, observers caution that the credibility of internal party democracy—and public trust in the broader electoral process—may be at stake.