The APC’s electronic membership registration drive, designed to modernise party records, has evolved into a struggle for power, legitimacy and control as defecting governors and founding stalwarts test popularity in a warm-up for the 2027 elections, LEO SOBECHI and ADAMU ABUH report

The ongoing electronic membership registration of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) across 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, is officially framed as a modernisation effort aimed at strengthening the party’s database and projecting organisational depth nationwide.

Yet beneath this administrative veneer lies a politically sensitive process capable of reshaping internal hierarchies, redistributing influence, and redefining the balance between founding members and powerful defectors.

While party officials present the exercise as a transparency-driven reform, fears are growing that harmonising legacy membership registers with newly captured digital records could ignite internal disputes. For a party that has witnessed a steady influx of governors and high-ranking politicians from opposition platforms, digital registration is evolving into a battleground where questions of legitimacy, structure, and succession intersect.

The revised January 30, 2026, deadline for the e-registration drive was widely interpreted as more than administrative housekeeping. Analysts see it as a tactical signal designed to accelerate political realignments ahead of the 2027 electoral cycle.

Governors contemplating defection were subtly pressured to formalise their entry, while state chapters were compelled to demonstrate organisational vitality. In effect, what began as a membership audit is morphing into a strategic instrument for consolidating political advantage.

Yet the reform has unsettled long-standing party stakeholders. Veteran figures who identify as “aboriginal APC” members argue that defectors, particularly incumbent governors, are leveraging their political weight to capture party structures. For them, the digital transition threatens to erase years of grassroots investment, replacing traditional loyalty networks with algorithm-driven legitimacy.

The APC national leadership, therefore, confronts a layered dilemma. Governors and federal lawmakers are pressing for automatic return tickets, citing incumbency stability, while the Presidency is reportedly pushing for direct primaries to weaken entrenched delegate systems. This divergence reflects deeper tensions over who controls candidate emergence and, by extension, the party’s ideological direction.

The status of cross-carpeting governors further complicates matters. Officially recognised as de facto leaders in their states, they wield enormous influence over delegate selection and structural appointments.

Yet this arrangement creates friction with founding members who fear marginalisation. The Rivers State scenario, where political rivals share federal allegiance despite partisan divisions, illustrates how pragmatic alliances can blur organisational boundaries.

At the heart of the contest lies institutional power. The Presidency seeksmechanisms to limit the influence of legislators perceived as disruptive, while governors aim to entrench loyalists within the National Assembly and the National Working Committee (NWC). These parallel ambitions reveal an internal recalibration where loyalty, patronage, and survival shape strategic calculations.

Delta State exemplifies this dynamic. Governor Sheriff Oborevwori and former governor Ifeanyi Okowa are manoeuvring to secure representation within the NWC, signalling their integration into APC’s decision-making core. Similar positioning is underway in Enugu, where Governor Peter Mbah’s camp seeks to renegotiate influence historically associated with structures overseen by Governor Hope Uzodimma.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s appointment of Prof. Nentawe Goshwe Yilwatda as national chairman, reportedly outside the governors’ consultative framework, underscores a presidential effort to reassert central authority.

Tinubu’s public affirmation that the choice was personal signalled a deliberate assertion of party supremacy over factional bargaining. It was both a message of confidence in Yilwatda and a reminder that ultimate arbitration rests with the Presidency.

For governors, who function as the party’s frontline electoral mobilisers, this centralising tendency introduces strategic uncertainty. Many are recalibrating alliances to ensure relevance within an evolving hierarchy where digital registration, structural reforms, and succession politics converge.

Congress versus Governors’ power play
The APC leadership recognises that unresolved rivalries could fracture the party at a critical juncture. Recent adjustments to the convention planning architecture, including the replacement of Hope Uzodimma with Aminu Bello Masari and Anyim Pius Anyim — were presented as efforts to broaden representation.

While critics interpret the reshuffle as a corrective to perceived overreach, party officials frame it as an institutional balancing act designed to diffuse regional tensions.

The forthcoming ward, state, and national congresses are therefore far more than procedural rituals. They represent a decisive test of APC’s internal resilience. With the 2027 elections already influencing strategic positioning, these congresses will determine whether institutional frameworks can contain ambition-driven rivalries without destabilising the party.

Central to this recalibration is the electronic membership registration. Historically, manual ward registers served as instruments of political control, defining eligibility, delegate status, and voting influence.

Digitisation disrupts this gatekeeping culture. By centralising data, the system reduces opportunities for manipulation and shifts emphasis from document control to genuine mobilisation.

Supporters argue that this reform enhances transparency and inclusiveness. Critics warn it may disproportionately benefit actors with superior logistical reach, typically governors and national figures, thereby entrenching elite dominance under the guise of reform. Either way, the transition alters the mechanics of political power within the party.

The timing of the exercise coincides with a wave of defections from opposition parties, suggesting a dual purpose: administrative modernisation and political absorption. While the influx expands APC’s numerical strength, it also intensifies structural competition as new entrants negotiate coexistence with established factions.

Legal observers caution that poorly managed congresses could trigger litigation that could derail candidate nominations. Nigeria’s political history shows that intra-party disputes frequently end up in court, where procedural irregularities have overturned conventions and primaries.

A flawed harmonisation process could therefore produce not just factional bitterness but constitutional complications with electoral consequences.

Sporadic schisms
At the grassroots level, APC’s evolving structure is defined by battles forward and local government control, arenas that determine delegate composition and nomination leverage. Enugu State offers a revealing case study.
Prior to recent defections, APC’s presence in Enugu was organisationally fragile. Internal divisions deepened when Ugochukwu Agballah assumed leadership with Uzodimma’s backing, sidelining older figures.

Governor Peter Mbah’s subsequent entry recalibrated the balance, prompting resistance that eventually gave way to mediated reconciliation.

A provisional power-sharing formula granted Agballah’s faction a stake in the emerging hierarchy, yet dissent persists. Founding members argue that concessions risk institutionalising inequality within a party built on collective sacrifice. Leadership reshuffles, including Ben Nwoye’s acting chairmanship, highlight ongoing fluidity.

Compounding the uncertainty are unresolved ambitions such as those of former minister Uchechukwu Nnaji, whose legal dispute and potential gubernatorial aspirations inject volatility into an already delicate equilibrium.
Mbah’s incumbency-backed bloc strengthens APC’s competitiveness but disrupts long-standing alliances, underscoring the tension between consolidation and inclusion.

Niger Delta: Clash of new ‘Sheriffs’ and APC aborigines
Delta State presents a sharper confrontation between legacy structures and gubernatorial influence. APC’s internal landscape is fragmented among factions aligned with Ovie Omo-Agege, Festus Keyamo, and Governor Oborevwori. Public gestures of unity mask persistent anxieties over delegate control and structural dominance.

Insiders warn that unresolved grievances could culminate in parallel congresses and protracted legal battles, scenarios that could weaken the party ahead of 2027. National leadership mediation will be essential to preserving coherence.

Rivers State reflects a similar recalibration following Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s defection. While his entry strengthens APC’s public profile, it intensifies rivalry between factions loyal to Nyesom Wike and those aligned with Fubara. Disputes over delegate lists and leadership positions could test the party’s crisis-management capacity.

In Akwa Ibom, Governor Umo Eno’s crossover introduces a strategic paradox. While expanding APC’s influence in a PDP stronghold, it raises questions about coexistence with structures associated with Senate President Godswill Akpabio. Delegate politics may consolidate gubernatorial authority while alienating sidelined actors.

Bayelsa appears comparatively stable, yet integration challenges remain. Balancing new entrants with legacy interests will determine whether latent tensions remain dormant or escalate.

The Kano example
The informal 60–40 power-sharing template, favouring defectors while preserving space for founding members, is emerging as a conflict-management experiment. Kano illustrates the northern dimension of this recalibration.

Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf’s entry from the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) introduces fresh variables into a high-stakes environment shaped by influential actors such as Deputy Senate President Barau Jibrin and former chairman Abdullahi Ganduje. Kano’s political weight means internal disputes could reverberate nationally.

Broadly, the influx of defecting governors expands APC’s electoral reach, financial capacity, and incumbency advantage. Yet expansion carries structural risks. Perceived marginalisation of loyalists, factional fragmentation, and elite capture narratives could erode trust if not carefully managed.

The congresses, therefore, function as both consolidation mechanisms and stress tests. Transparent accommodation of competing interests could reinforce unity ahead of 2027. Failure risks converting organisational reform into prolonged internal conflict.

Ultimately, APC’s digital membership drive is not merely a technological upgrade.

It is a political recalibration that intersects with succession planning, delegate politics, and institutional legitimacy.

The unfolding negotiations within refurbished state chapters will shape not only subnational alignments but also the party’s national trajectory.

Institutional reform in a dominant political party is rarely neutral. It is a contest over identity, authority, and the architecture of power, one that will determine whether APC emerges from its expansion as a cohesive coalition or a federation of competing empires heading into Nigeria’s next electoral cycle.