By Musa Tanimu Nasidi
The debate over the supremacy of the political party has resurfaced in Kogi State following recent developments within the All Progressives Congress (APC), particularly in Kogi West Senatorial District.
For some party members supporting the position of the APC executive, the argument is straightforward: “The party is supreme.”
Indeed, no serious political organisation can operate effectively without discipline, rules and respect for its leadership. But the question that deserves attention is whether the principle of party supremacy should be interpreted to mean unquestioning obedience, even where party members believe that a particular decision may weaken the party at the grassroots.
That is where the current controversy becomes important.
The people who attended the recent town hall meeting did not attend a programme organised by the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). They attended an APC-related political engagement involving Senator Sunday Karimi, who is widely regarded within the party as its flagbearer in Kogi West.
If the objective of the APC is victory at the polls, should party executives who interact directly with the electorate be treated as enemies simply because they attended such an engagement?
That question deserves an honest answer.
The Primary Election Question
There is also a legal dimension to the controversy surrounding the party’s nomination.
Supporters of Senator Karimi argue that he emerged from the APC primary and that those who participated in the process should respect the outcome.
On the other hand, there are allegations that another aspirant, Samuel Bamidele Aro, did not participate in the APC primary but subsequently challenged the emergence of Karimi.
That allegation, if established by the court record, raises an important issue of locus standi.
Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act 2022 provides that an aspirant who complains that the provisions of the Electoral Act, the Constitution or the guidelines of a political party were not complied with in the selection or nomination of a candidate may seek redress in the appropriate court.
The courts have consistently interpreted this provision as requiring the complainant to have participated in the relevant primary election.
The Supreme Court’s earlier decision in Shinkafi & Anor v. Yari & Ors is particularly instructive. The Court held that only an aspirant who participated in the primary has the necessary standing to challenge the selection or nomination of a candidate.
Similarly, in Maihaja v. Gaidam, the Supreme Court reiterated that an aspirant seeking to invoke the relevant statutory provision must have participated in the primary election. The Court described the requirement as a necessary precondition for challenging the nomination process.
The principle was also reaffirmed in Babayemi v. PDP & Ors, where the court relied on Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act 2022 and held that an aggrieved aspirant must have physically participated in the primary election in order to challenge its conduct or outcome.
Therefore, if the allegation that Aro did not participate in the APC primary is factually established, his legal standing to challenge the outcome would naturally become a significant preliminary issue for the court.
It is important, however, not to prejudge the case. The final determination belongs to the court after considering the pleadings and evidence before it.
“The Party Is Supreme” — But Who Builds the Party?
There is nothing wrong with the assertion that the party is supreme.
But political parties do not exist in abstraction.
The party is ultimately made up of people: ward executives, local government leaders, elected officials, appointees, ordinary members, supporters and voters.
A party structure without grassroots acceptance is like a building with an impressive roof but weak foundations.
The real strength of a political party is tested not at meetings of executives but at polling units.
This is why the suspension of ward executives who have direct contact with voters should be approached with caution.
If a ward executive spends months mobilising voters, attending community meetings and maintaining relationships with constituents, removing or alienating such a person may create a gap that cannot easily be filled through directives from above.
Can Political Appointees Deliver Their Polling Units?
Another issue raised by political observers is the assumption that every government appointee automatically possesses sufficient political influence to deliver his or her polling unit.
Political appointment and electoral influence are not necessarily the same thing.
A person may occupy a government position and still have limited grassroots acceptance. Conversely, an ordinary ward executive may have little formal power but possess considerable influence within his community.
This is the difference between political office and political capital.
Political capital is accumulated through relationships, accessibility, trust and years of interaction with voters.
It cannot simply be distributed through appointments.
The Social Media Question
Some political observers have also expressed concern that the APC may be placing too much confidence in young political actors whose influence is primarily visible on social media.
Social media has unquestionably transformed Nigerian politics. It is now an important tool for communication, mobilisation and public relations.
But elections are not conducted on Facebook, WhatsApp, X or TikTok.
They are conducted at polling units.
A candidate may have millions of impressions online and still struggle to mobilise voters in a particular ward.
This is why Senator Karimi’s town hall meetings with constituents have attracted attention among his supporters. The significance of such meetings is not merely the number of people who attend them; it is the opportunity to interact directly with constituents, hear their grievances and maintain personal political relationships.
As one political observer put it, “How can you suspend executives who have direct contact with the electorate and still expect them to deliver the polling units?”
That question deserves consideration.
Grassroots Politics Cannot Be Replaced
The history of Nigerian elections demonstrates that political structures matter.
The ward remains the basic unit of electoral mobilisation. From the ward to the polling unit, elections are ultimately won by people who know the voters personally.
This makes grassroots executives indispensable.
They know who has moved away.
They know the families in their communities.
They know the traditional leaders, youth groups, women organisations and community influencers.
They know the political history of their wards.
They know where the party is strong and where it is weak.
For this reason, party leadership should not regard ward executives merely as instruments for implementing directives. They should be treated as partners in electoral strategy.
The Need for Reconciliation
The APC still has an opportunity to turn the current disagreement into an opportunity for reconciliation.
Rather than widening the gulf between the executive structure and supporters of Senator Karimi, the leadership could convene a genuine reconciliation meeting involving the different tendencies within the party.
The objective should not be to determine who is more powerful.
The objective should be to determine how the party can win.
That requires humility from the leadership, restraint from supporters and a willingness by all sides to place the collective interest above personal grievances.
The Ballot Will Be the Final Judge
Ultimately, the electorate—not party executives, social media commentators or political appointees—will determine the outcome of the next election.
The electorate will judge candidates by their performance, accessibility, credibility and ability to represent their interests.
The APC therefore has a choice.
It can interpret every independent political engagement as disloyalty and continue down the path of confrontation.
Or it can recognise that political competition and differences of opinion are natural in a democratic party and use dialogue to strengthen its structure.
The principle that “the party is supreme” should therefore be understood alongside another equally important principle: the people are the source of the party’s electoral mandate.
A party that loses touch with its grassroots may retain its executives, offices and titles, but it risks losing the very people who determine electoral victory.
For the APC in Kogi State, the time for political sobriety is now.
The party needs its ward executives.
It needs its grassroots supporters.
It needs its political leaders.
And above all, it needs unity.
Because when the campaign ends and the ballot boxes are opened, it will not be the loudest voice on social media that counts.
It will be the voters at the polling units.
– Musa Tanimu Nasidi writes from Lokoja.
