In the heart of Nigeria's Southeast, a deputy speaker's declaration that "no one owns the party" has ignited a fierce debate about power, ownership, and the future of the nation's ruling political machine.

The air in Umuahia, the capital of Abia State, was thick with more than just the February humidity. On Wednesday, February 25, 2026, a gathering of All Progressives Congress (APC) stakeholders for a rescheduled ward congress became the unlikely stage for a profound ideological statement. Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dr. Benjamin Kalu, stood before the party faithful and delivered a line that would ripple across Nigeria’s political landscape: “No individual owns the APC, not even [President] Bola Tinubu.” According to reports from Vanguard Nigeria and Business Day, Kalu, the APC’s leader in Abia State, framed this not as rebellion, but as doctrine, attributing the sentiment to the President himself. “When I met with him,” Kalu revealed, “he said, ‘I can’t even say my party, I like saying our party.’”

This declaration, made during the delicate mechanics of a “congress of harmonisation,” is far more than routine political rhetoric. It is a direct challenge to the entrenched culture of “godfatherism” and personal fiefdoms that has defined Nigerian politics for generations. It exposes the central tension within the APC as it stares down the 2027 general elections: is it a modern, institutionalized political party, or is it a coalition of powerful individuals held together by patronage and personal ambition? The answer, being forged in Abia’s 184 wards, will shape not just the fate of a single state, but the very nature of Nigeria’s democracy.

The Congress of Harmonisation: Healing Wounds or Papering Over Cracks?

The event in Umuahia was not the first attempt at a congress. As detailed by Daily Post Nigeria and the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), the party had been forced to reschedule its ward and local government congresses to February 25 and 26 after canceling a previous exercise. The reason for the cancellation, as explained by Kalu, was symptomatic of the disease he now seeks to cure: factionalism and indiscipline. “The earlier congress was cancelled because there were multiple forms in the state against the directive of the national leadership of the party,” he stated. In political parlance, “multiple forms” signifies parallel structures, rival factions printing their own membership and nomination documents—a clear attempt to hijack the party apparatus by competing interests.

The rescheduled event was thus rebranded a “congress of harmonisation.” Emmanuel Goar, Chairman of the Congress Committee and former Speaker of the Plateau State House of Assembly, promised a peaceful and transparent process. “Harmonisation is where stakeholders are given a sense of belonging in deciding who will lead from their ward to their local government, as well as the state,” Kalu elaborated to the gathered stakeholders. “It is where everybody is given a sense of importance, of relevance, where it will be made obvious that no one man will own the party, not Benjamin Kalu, not anybody.”

This language is a deliberate pivot. For decades, Nigerian political parties, particularly in the Southeast, have been characterized by bitter internal wars. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)’s hold on Abia for years was marked by such schisms. The APC, seeking to expand beyond its traditional strongholds in the Southwest and Northwest, cannot afford to import these destructive pathologies into its structure in the Southeast. The goal, as Kalu framed it, is to “eliminate internal divisions and build a united front, anchored on discipline, inclusion, and purpose.” The subtext is a stark warning: without unity, the dream of capturing Abia State in 2027 is futile.

The Ghost of Godfatherism: A Nigerian Political Tradition Under Siege

Kalu’s statement, especially the explicit inclusion of President Tinubu’s name, is a cannonball fired at the ship of Nigerian political convention. The concept of the “party leader” in Nigeria has rarely been a neutral, administrative title. It has been synonymous with “owner,” “sponsor,” and “godfather.” From the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo and the Action Group to the powerful “Lagos Boys” structure, political power has been intensely personalized.

President Tinubu himself, often called the “National Leader” of the APC, rose to prominence through a formidable political machine built over decades in Lagos State. His political acumen and strategic alliances were indisputably central to the formation and success of the APC. This history makes Kalu’s attribution all the more significant. By publicly stating that the President prefers “our party” to “my party,” Kalu is attempting to recast Tinubu’s legacy from that of a supreme godfather to that of a foundational architect who now advocates for institutional maturity.

The reaction to this narrative will be a critical test. In states like Rivers, Kano, and indeed Lagos, the APC is often perceived through the prism of dominant local figures. Can a party whose national campaign is bankrolled by a handful of wealthy patrons truly convince its rank-and-file members in Umuahia or Abakaliki that they have an equal stake? Kalu’s argument is that it must, for its own survival. “The party belongs to all its members,” he insisted. This is the theoretical bedrock of democracy, but in Nigeria, it often collides with the practical realities of funding, security, and media access, which are frequently controlled by individuals.

The Abia Crucible: A Microcosm of National Ambition

Abia State is not a casual battlefield; it is a strategic prize. Historically a PDP stronghold, the Southeast remains the most challenging geopolitical zone for the APC to penetrate. Success in Abia would represent a monumental breakthrough, shattering the regional perception of the APC as a “foreign” party. Benjamin Kalu, as both Deputy Speaker and APC leader in the state, carries the weight of this mission. His message of collective ownership is, therefore, also a tactical necessity.

To build a winning coalition in Abia, the APC must attract disaffected PDP members, engage with influential local leaders, and mobilize a skeptical populace. This is impossible under a structure seen as controlled by a single individual from Abuja or Lagos. The “harmonisation” congress is an attempt to create a big tent. By distributing forms across all 184 wards and promising inclusive leadership selection, the party aims to present itself as a more democratic alternative to what it labels as the PDP’s top-down, crisis-ridden model.

However, the path is fraught. The same stakeholders Kalu addressed include individuals with their own ambitions and networks. The promise that “no one man will own the party, not Benjamin Kalu” is also a pledge of restraint from Kalu himself. It is an attempt to preempt accusations that he, as the highest-ranking federal official from the state, is simply building his own personal empire under the APC banner. His credibility in this endeavor hinges on a demonstrably fair congress and a subsequent sharing of power that reflects the diverse interests within the state chapter.

Economic and Social Dimensions: The Cost of Political Ownership

The debate over who owns a political party is not an abstract philosophical exercise; it has direct and severe consequences for economic development and social welfare. When a party is perceived as the private property of an individual or a small clique, governance becomes an extension of patronage. Contract awards, civil service appointments, and policy initiatives are tailored to benefit the godfather’s network, not necessarily the public good.

In Abia, a state with immense commercial potential in commerce (Aba is famously known as “Japan of Africa” for its manufacturing) and agriculture, the need for transparent, policy-driven governance is acute. Investors are wary of jurisdictions where political instability and favoritism dictate business outcomes. Kalu’s push for a party “anchored on discipline, inclusion, and purpose” is implicitly a promise of a different governance model—one where party membership translates to a voice in policy, not just a ticket for patronage.

Socially, the culture of political ownership exacerbates divisions. It creates “insiders” and “outsiders,” fueling bitterness and violence, especially during congresses and primaries. The cancelled first congress in Abia, with its “multiple forms,” is a classic symptom. By striving for a harmonised, inclusive process, the APC in Abia is attempting to lower the social temperature and build a broader, more stable base of support, which is essential for long-term electoral success.

Future Implications: The 2027 Litmus Test and Beyond

The events in Umuahia are a precursor to a nationwide drama. The APC, now over a decade old and having controlled the federal government for nearly nine years, is at an inflection point. Is it a permanent fixture of Nigerian democracy, or a transient coalition? The answer lies in its ability to institutionalize.

1. For the 2027 Elections: The success or failure of the “harmonisation” model in Abia will be closely watched by other state chapters. If it leads to a cohesive, motivated party that makes significant gains in the 2027 state elections, it will become the template for the APC’s expansion. If it collapses into renewed acrimony, it will reinforce the old model of strongman politics. President Tinubu’s reported ethos of “our party” will be tested in the crucible of his own party’s primaries and campaign strategies. 2. For Nigerian Democracy: A genuine shift from personalistic parties to institutionalized ones would be the most significant development in Nigerian politics since the 1999 return to democracy. It would create space for ideology, policy debate, and internal accountability. It would make parties less vulnerable to the death or defection of a single leader. Kalu’s statement, if acted upon, could be a small step toward this transformative goal. 3. For the APC’s Legacy: The party now has the opportunity to define its second decade. Will it be remembered as the coalition that ended the PDP’s dominance but replicated its flaws, or as the vehicle that finally professionalized Nigerian politics? The commitment to “unity, expansion, and preparation for the 2027 General Elections,” as reported by NAN, must be underpinned by a genuine culture of collective ownership to achieve a lasting legacy.

As the forms were distributed across Abia’s wards, the question lingered in the Umuahia air: Was this a fleeting moment of political poetry, or the birth of a new praxis? Dr. Benjamin Kalu, with the attributed blessing of the President, has thrown down a gauntlet not just to his party members in the Southeast, but to the entire Nigerian political class. The coming months will reveal if the APC has the courage to pick it up and prove that in Nigeria, a political party can truly belong to the people.