Nigeria’s already charged political atmosphere intensified at the weekend as leading opposition figures and the Presidency traded sharply worded accusations over the role of anti-corruption agencies, the wave of defections to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), and the future of the country’s multiparty democracy.
In a sweeping joint statement signed by some of the nation’s most prominent opposition leaders—including former Senate President David Mark, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, Bode George and John Odigie-Oyegun—the opposition warned that Nigeria is “gradually sliding” into a state where key institutions of law enforcement are perceived as instruments of political persecution rather than impartial guardians of accountability.
The statement accused the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Nigeria Police and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) of being increasingly deployed to intimidate opposition politicians, weaken dissenting voices and coerce elected officials—particularly governors—into defecting to the ruling party. According to the opposition, recent defections have reinforced public suspicion that state power is being used not to fight corruption but to engineer political realignment ahead of the 2027 general election.
Describing the trend as a “covert, undemocratic agenda,” the opposition leaders warned that an attempt to collapse all state governments into the President’s party through intimidation would pose “a grave danger to Nigeria’s democratic future.” They argued that allegations against ruling party figures are routinely ignored, while opposition politicians face aggressive investigations, media trials and prolonged prosecutions.
To illustrate what they called selective enforcement, the opposition cited cases of former ministers who resigned amid public scandals but have not been charged, while remaining active in ruling party political activities. They also alleged that defectors to the APC are rewarded with protection and appointments, a practice they linked to a long-standing perception—popularly summarised by a past ruling party chairman’s remark that joining the APC comes with forgiveness of “sins.”
Beyond accusations, the opposition issued a list of demands, including the depoliticisation of the EFCC, a return to its statutory mandate, the embedding of preventive anti-corruption mechanisms in government payment processes, and the creation of an independent review body to examine public accounts at federal, state and local government levels from 2015 to 2025. They warned that failure to halt what they described as growing injustice could trigger serious political instability as the next election cycle approaches.
In a swift and blistering rebuttal, the Presidency dismissed the opposition’s claims as the theatrics of “failed politicians” searching for scapegoats. In a statement signed by the President’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the government described the opposition as a regrouping of “a dying political party” and unsuccessful aspirants seeking relevance through alarmist narratives.
The Presidency rejected outright any suggestion that defections to the APC were forced, insisting that Nigeria’s Constitution guarantees freedom of association and that politicians are joining the ruling party voluntarily, motivated by what it described as the “noticeable gains” of President Bola Tinubu’s reform agenda. It argued that mass defections did not threaten democracy in earlier years when politicians moved in large numbers to the then-dominant Peoples Democratic Party.
On the EFCC, the Presidency maintained that the anti-graft agency is independent and operates strictly within its legal mandate. It denied that President Tinubu issues directives on who should be investigated or prosecuted, stressing that accountability is enforced through the courts, not political manipulation. Those facing investigation, the statement said, should defend themselves rather than “wage a war of attrition against accountability and probity.”
The Presidency further noted that some signatories to the opposition statement had faced EFCC investigations and prosecutions long before Tinubu assumed office in 2023, with some allegedly implicated in international money laundering probes. It questioned whether the latest outcry was driven by fear that “chickens are coming home to roost,” warning against undermining national institutions to evade scrutiny.
As both sides dig in, the confrontation has exposed deep fault lines over the balance between anti-corruption enforcement and political pluralism. While the opposition frames its warning as a defence of democracy and institutional independence, the Presidency casts the same claims as a cynical attempt to escape accountability.
With 2027 looming, the clash underscores a central question confronting Nigeria’s democracy: whether the fight against corruption is being strengthened as a national virtue, or increasingly perceived as a political weapon—an argument that now plays out not just in courtrooms and party meetings, but in the court of public opinion and the conscience of the nation.
