In the intricate theatre of Nigerian politics, consensus is often presented as a tool of unity. Yet, in practice, it can become a flashpoint for conflict—especially when it collides with competing ambitions and shifting party directives. This paradox is currently unfolding in Gombe State, where Governor Muhammadu Inuwa Yahaya’s consensus-driven strategy for candidate selection within the All Progressives Congress (APC) has triggered internal tensions, exposing deeper fractures within the party’s structure.
At the heart of the controversy lies a fundamental question: Can consensus truly coexist with democratic competition in a politically charged environment?
A Strategy Meets Resistance
Governor Yahaya’s approach was, on the surface, strategic. By promoting consensus candidates across key electoral positions, the administration sought to reduce intra-party acrimony, conserve resources, and present a united front ahead of the 2027 general elections. The process, according to party officials, involved consultations with stakeholders ranging from the State Working Committee to party elders and aspirants.
However, what was intended as a unifying mechanism has instead ignited resistance from notable political figures. High-profile aspirants—including former Governor,Senator Mohammad Danjuma Goje, Professor Isa Pantami, Senator Saidu Alkali, and Dr. Langa Hassan Bangunji—have openly challenged the process, questioning both its transparency and legitimacy.
Their opposition reflects a broader concern within Nigeria’s political ecosystem: that consensus arrangements, while constitutionally permissible, may sometimes be perceived as instruments of exclusion rather than inclusion.
National Directive vs. State Practice
Compounding the crisis is the apparent contradiction between the APC’s national directive and its implementation at the state level. The party’s national leadership has unequivocally adopted direct primaries for the 2026 election cycle, emphasizing internal democracy and wider participation.
This policy shift was formally communicated to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), with a detailed timetable outlining primaries for presidential, legislative, and governorship positions.
The message was clear—every aspirant should have an equal opportunity to contest.
Yet in Gombe, the adoption of consensus candidates appears to challenge this directive, creating a tension between national policy and state-level political realities.
This disconnect raises critical questions about coherence within party structures and the limits of decentralised decision-making.
The Party’s Defence
In response to mounting criticism, the APC in Gombe State has defended its actions, insisting that consensus remains a legitimate and constitutionally backed option.
According to the State Publicity Secretary, Amb. Moses Kyari, the process was inclusive and voluntary.
Party officials argue that all aspirants were duly invited to participate in the consensus-building exercise and that those now protesting had, in some cases, chosen not to engage.
From this perspective, the backlash is seen less as a procedural flaw and more as a reaction to political outcomes.
Importantly, the party maintains that consensus is not compulsory. Aspirants dissatisfied with the arrangement are free to test their popularity through direct primaries—an option the party says remains open.
Unity or Fragmentation?
Despite these assurances, the political atmosphere in Gombe suggests that the issue runs deeper than procedural disagreements.
The emergence of Dr. Jamilu Shaiyaku Gwamna as the consensus governorship candidate, alongside other endorsed candidates across senatorial and federal constituencies, has effectively redrawn the state’s political map.
While supporters of the governor view this as a demonstration of strong leadership and organisational control, critics interpret it as a consolidation of power that risks alienating key stakeholders.
The stakes are high. Political history in Nigeria shows that unresolved intra-party disputes often lead to defections, parallel campaigns, or weakened electoral performance.
For a ruling party seeking to maintain dominance, internal cohesion is not just desirable—it is essential.
The Larger Democratic Question
Beyond Gombe, the unfolding scenario speaks to a recurring dilemma in Nigeria’s democratic journey: the balance between elite consensus and grassroots participation.
Consensus, when genuinely inclusive, can foster stability and reduce conflict. But when perceived as imposed or exclusionary, it can undermine trust and legitimacy. Direct primaries, on the other hand, promote participation but can be resource-intensive and divisive.
The APC’s current predicament illustrates that neither approach is inherently superior; their effectiveness depends largely on context, transparency, and the willingness of political actors to prioritise collective goals over individual ambitions.
A Test of Political Leadership
For Governor Yahaya, this moment represents more than a political challenge—it is a test of leadership. Navigating the crisis will require not only strategic recalibration but also genuine engagement with dissenting voices.
Whether the party ultimately leans towards consensus or direct primaries, the process must be seen as credible and fair. Anything less risks deepening divisions and weakening the party’s electoral prospects.
Finally, as Gombe’s political landscape continues to evolve, one thing is clear: the path to unity is rarely straightforward. The interplay between consensus and competition will remain a defining feature of Nigeria’s party politics.
For the APC in Gombe State, the immediate task is to transform a moment of crisis into an opportunity for institutional strengthening.
Whether it succeeds will depend on its ability to reconcile competing interests while upholding the principles of internal democracy.
In the end, the real contest may not be between candidates—but between political ideals.
Chief Ben Ngwakwe is a media communicator, political analyst and professional Journalist based in Gombe State.
