The Electoral Act 2026 (Section 84) remains firm on a crucial rule: a party can only adopt a consensus candidate if all cleared aspirants for that position provide written consent indicating their voluntary withdrawal.
Many aspirants in the APC governorship primaries (particularly in states like Nasarawa, Kwara, and Ogun) are refusing to sign these withdrawal letters.
Without these signed letters, any “consensus” result announced by the party is technically a violation of the Act. Aspirants argue that governors are “extorting” these signatures through political threats or simply proceeding as if they exist.
The 2026 Act introduced a stricter “fallback” mechanism compared to the 2022 version. If a single aspirant refuses to sign the consensus agreement, the party must revert to Direct Primaries (where every registered party member votes).
Parties are hesitant to conduct direct primaries because they are expensive, harder to control, and require a verified Digital Membership Register (a new 2026 requirement). Aspirants are using this as leverage, demanding the “field” (direct voting) if they aren’t the chosen consensus candidate.
Even when a consensus is reached, the law requires a Special Convention or Congress to ratify the choice. Aspirants are now heading to the Federal High Court, alleging that these ratification congresses were “shadow events” where no actual voting or affirmation took place, rendering the nomination null and void.
