Nigeria’s Opposition in Turmoil: How the PDP’s Convention Clash Exposes a Party—and a Democracy—Under Strain

By Ephraim Agbo 

A party that once called itself the “bedrock” of Nigeria’s democracy is pushing up against the limits of its own coherence. Over the past fortnight the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has careened from courtroom injunctions to tear-gas pitched confrontations, expulsions of senior figures, and new waves of defections to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). The result is not only a leadership vacuum inside Nigeria’s biggest opposition formation but also a dangerous weakening of the country’s democratic alternative at a time when political competition should be strengthening, not fraying.

“A party that once styled itself the bedrock of Nigeria’s democracy is fraying at the edges.”

The flashpoints: court orders, convention chaos and expulsions

What began as a routine — if politically charged — national convention in Ibadan quickly morphed into a symbol of the PDP’s dysfunction. Multiple courts issued conflicting injunctions that stopped and restarted the convention, forcing party organs and delegates into legal and logistical paralysis. Those legal entanglements underscored how political disputes have migrated into the courts, with rival factions seeking injunctions to block or validate leadership moves.

“The convention became less a forum for renewal than a battleground for rival power centres.”

The convention itself produced explosive outcomes: a newly elected national chairman, public expulsions of prominent figures (including Nyesom Wike, Ayodele Fayose and others), and competing claims to legitimacy by rival party committees. The expulsions, in particular, risk deepening schisms rather than resolving them, with expelled leaders and their supporters already signalling alternative gatherings and legal counter-measures.

“Expulsions risk deepening schisms rather than resolving them.”

From governorships to defections: erosion of organisational unity

The PDP’s troubles are not merely procedural — they are structural. Throughout 2025 a steady trickle of governors and state actors defected to the APC; recent developments in Taraba and other states suggest that defections continue to metastasize at sub-national levels. These flows of personnel degrade the party’s organisational muscle: local structures collapse when governors shift allegiance, taking civil servants, financiers and local patronage networks with them. The immediate political consequence is a sharply diminished capacity to mount coordinated election campaigns or to act as an effective opposition in the legislature.

“Defections eat away at the PDP’s organisational muscle — and with it, its ability to mobilise.”

Factions, personalities and the fault lines

At the heart of the crisis are personality rivalries turned institutional. Two camps have crystallised around high-profile figures: the governors’ bloc and a cohort aligned with influential ministers and former governors like Nyesom Wike. Strategic disagreements — over candidate selection, control of party committees, the role of governors in internal party governance, and how to respond to court interventions — have hardened into mutual distrust. Commentary in national outlets describes what looks increasingly like a “civil war” within the party, with parallel gatherings and mutually exclusive claims to party organs.

“What appears as policy disagreement is, more often, a struggle for control of patronage and party machines.”

Legalisation of politics — and its cost

The resort to the judiciary to settle essentially political disputes has been a recurring feature of Nigerian politics for years. What’s different now is the frequency and the high stakes: conflicting rulings from different benches have repeatedly halted party processes and left the PDP more vulnerable to opponents who can court favourable rulings or exploit legal ambiguity. The result is institutional paralysis: when internal dispute resolution becomes litigated in fragmented courts, the party’s ability to adjudicate disputes internally at speed and with credibility collapses.

“When party politics migrates to multiple courtrooms, organisational autonomy is the first casualty.”

Public order and optics: when politics becomes physical

Beyond courtrooms and committee rooms, tensions spilled into the streets and party offices. Reports of tear gas being used during standoffs and of governors physically confronting rival factions underscore the party’s descent from organisational dispute to public disorder. These scenes damage the PDP’s image as a stable alternative to the ruling party and give the APC both material and rhetorical ammunition: they can now argue that the PDP is too fractured to govern.

“Scenes of tear gas and brawling governors handed the ruling party an easy narrative: the opposition cannot govern itself.”

What this means for Nigeria’s political landscape

1. Short-term electoral weakness: With defections and local collapses, the PDP is likely to be less effective at mobilising votes in the next national cycle. Its fractured messaging and competing slates will benefit the APC in both legislative and gubernatorial contests.
2. Polarisation of opposition politics: The breakdown of a unified opposition increases the risk that contestation takes more informal, extra-institutional forms — street protests, contestation in the courts, and opportunistic patronage deals — reducing the space for programmatic competition.
3. Judicialisation entrenched: The escalating pattern of court intervention sets a norm where internal party disputes are rarely solved within party rules, incentivising political actors to “forum-shop” for favourable judges. That undermines both party autonomy and public confidence in the legal process.
4. A test for Nigeria’s democracy: A functioning multiparty system requires credible opposition; the PDP’s implosion therefore has normative as well as tactical implications. If one major opposition party collapses into factionalism, long-term democratic accountability suffers.

“If the opposition cannot hold itself together, democratic accountability becomes harder to claim.”

Possible scenarios and strategic moves

Analytically, three broad scenarios are plausible in the near term:

• Recomposition through negotiation: Senior party elders, federated chapters, and pivotal governors broker a settlement (possibly a caretaker committee) that reins in expulsions and sets a timetable for inclusive reconciliation. This would be the quickest path to stabilisation but requires significant concessions from hardliners.

• Permanent realignment: The defections continue, leading to a depleted PDP and a strengthened APC that consolidates control. This would accelerate a shift in Nigeria’s party system towards one-party dominance — dangerous for democratic pluralism.

• Prolonged fragmentation and legal limbo: Competing factions pursue both legal and political strategies, producing neither reconciliation nor decisive realignment, leaving the party in limbo and voters disoriented. This outcome prolongs institutional weakness and polarisation.

Key strategic moves that could change the calculus include credible third-party mediation (by respected national figures), courts’ willingness to produce clear, enforceable rulings rather than issuing contradictory injunctions, and a determined effort by state chapters to preserve organisational continuity independent of gubernatorial whims.

“Credible mediation and clear judicial rulings are the narrow exits from a widening crisis.”

International angle: why external observers should care

For international observers, the PDP crisis matters for three reasons. First, Nigeria is the continent’s largest democracy and any erosion of its opposition politics reshapes regional democratic norms. Second, instability inside the main opposition party affects governance outcomes — weak opposition oversight correlates with weaker checks on executive power and potential democratic backsliding. Third, party fragmentation can affect policy continuity on economic reform, security cooperation and regional diplomacy — areas where foreign partners seek predictable interlocutors.

Conclusion: a crossroads moment

The PDP’s convulsions are, at root, a symptom of a party that has struggled to rebuild institutional norms after years of elite bargaining and personalised control. The coming weeks will likely determine whether the party pursues the painful work of internal reform and reconciliation or splinters further into personality-driven camps. Either outcome will reshape Nigeria’s political arithmetic for the next electoral cycle — and, in the worst case, remove a meaningful counterweight to executive power at a time when robust opposition is most needed.

“This is a crossroads: rebuild institutions, or watch the opposition become a cautionary tale.”