Five months after the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) was birthed by a court order on a promise to “do things differently,” the party is already facing its first major credibility test in Abuja. On July 4, 2026, leaders of the NDC South East Geopolitical Zone, FCT, allegedly told journalists that the National Leadership, including National Leader H.E. Senator Seriake Dickson, and the party’s presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi were moving to impose a candidate in the AMAC/Bwari House of Representatives primary. They say the move is an attempt to deny Mr. Obika the mandate that party members and other aspirants allegedly conceded to him. The charge, if true, puts the young NDC’s commitment to internal democracy under public scrutiny, Ekuson Nw’Ogbunka, our Managing Editor takes an assessment of everything. Read the excerpts.
The briefing was led by Hon. Maxwell Igbokwe, Chairman of the NDC South East Geopolitical Zone, FCT. He opened with the party’s founding narrative: “Our great party, the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) was born in February 2026 courtesy of a valid court order and built on our founding principle to do things differently from other political parties.”
For Igbokwe, the AMAC/Bwari episode “strikes at the very heart of our democracy.” The South East Zone said the “increasing public concern over the manipulation of NDC party primaries” by the National Leadership cannot be ignored. Their position: a new party cannot inherit the old habits it was created to dismantle.
Central to the allegation is what happened at the primary itself. According to accounts relayed at the briefing, “all the experience stepped down and endorsed Abbika,” but the party refused to announce him as winner. Instead, the process was suspended and “they were allowed to go and pick up” a candidate later. To the FCT South East leaders, that was substitution, not consensus.
Chief Okey Nwoke, the Zone’s PRO, framed the legal problem in plain terms: “You cannot shave a man in his absence. They have to be there. Then you talk to them.” He argued that the aspirants were not notified before the “illegal action” was taken, making the outcome procedurally defective.
Nwoke defined consensus under the Electoral Act as a negotiation, not a decree. “Consensus as a process, is a negotiation. So the idea is that the aspirant will be there, then you will now start negotiating consensus.” He warned that “you cannot sit in your office and say your national leader… and impose who will be the candidate of the party.”
The PRO was emphatic on the law. Such imposition, he said, “is against the law of the land, is against the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, is against the Electoral Act.” In his view, the “bone of contention is that everything” — notice, presence, and procedure — was bypassed.
The zone also questioned the political standing of the candidate being pushed. Nwoke said the person “has no business in AMAC/Bwari and the FCT politics… He should go back to where he comes from.” He added that the constituency already has a representative with a record, and “House of Reps is not a retirement home.”
On timing, Nwoke rejected the idea that the Zone was late to act. “Please, it’s not a question of allowing anybody,” he said. The issue, he maintained, is exclusion: aspirants must be present for any consensus to be valid.
When asked to distinguish a lawful consensus from what occurred, Nwoke cited the Electoral Act. It allows only two routes: “direct primaries” or “valid consensus.” A valid consensus requires “all the aspirants, without exception… then few party leaders.” Without the aspirants, he said, “it is a sham.”
He explained the threshold for direct primaries as well. Because NDC has a “massive number of registered members,” it cannot be done in a hall. “It has to hold in all the wards of the constituency… at a place of registration, which is the ward,” he stated. Anything less is not direct primaries in law.
The briefing also drew comparisons. Asked about the difference between a candidate-led consensus and a national leader picking one person, Nwoke said the law is clear: stakeholders must be present. Otherwise, it is imposition.
The name of Senator Dickson featured in the context of party leadership direction. The Zone cited his recent public declaration, arguing that top leadership statements must align with due process. The reference was used to press home the point that authority must not override procedure.
A journalist’s question linked the dispute to political precedent, asking about “the difference between Peter Obi, a political candidate, and Sarah Dixon bringing up to one candidate.” Nwoke’s response returned to statute: consensus without all aspirants is not consensus.
The South East Zone presented itself as a corrective voice inside NDC. “We cannot suddenly become what we set out to change. Party internal democracy is not a slogan, it is a constitutional requirement,” Igbokwe said. For them, AMAC/Bwari is a test of that principle.
The practical demand is procedural redress. The Zone wants either a lawful consensus with all aspirants at the table, or direct primaries across every ward. Anything else, they insist, will be challenged as unconstitutional and anti-democratic.
In sum, the NDC South East Geopolitical Zone, FCT, is alleging that Obika’s mandate is being set aside by a process it calls illegal. Whether the National Leadership heeds the warning will determine if NDC’s first election cycle begins with reform, or with the same imposition it promised to end.
