By Ibrahim Kegbegbe
When a sitting senator is denied entry into a stakeholders’ meeting of his own party, it is not just a local political drama—it is a reflection of a deeper institutional culture. The events of Monday, April 20, 2026, in Ijebu Ode, where Gbenga Daniel was barred from an All Progressives Congress (APC) meeting that eventually endorsed Dapo Abiodun for the Ogun East senatorial seat, fit into a broader pattern that has come to define the ruling party’s internal politics.
At first glance, the incident may appear as just another episode of intra-party disagreement. But a closer look reveals something more troubling: a consistent tendency within the APC to sidestep open democratic processes in favour of orchestrated outcomes.
Gbenga Daniel, the incumbent senator representing Ogun East, was not merely absent from the meeting—he was effectively excluded. In practical terms, denying a contestant access to the very forum where decisions about candidacy are made is equivalent to disqualification without due process. It raises a fundamental question: can consensus truly exist where participation is restricted?
A Familiar Script
What happened in Ijebu Ode is not without precedent. The APC, since its formation, has struggled to balance internal democracy with political expediency. The most dramatic example remains the emergence of Bukola Saraki as Senate President in 2015.
On June 9, 2015, during the inauguration of the 8th National Assembly, Saraki executed a political masterstroke that caught his party off guard. While the APC leadership had endorsed Ahmed Lawan as its preferred candidate, Saraki built a cross-party alliance with senators from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In a session boycotted by many APC loyalists, he secured 57 votes and emerged Senate President unopposed.
READ ALSO:Ajadi Seeks G-22 Backing for 2027 Governorship Bid, Pledges Unity and Inclusive Leadership
That episode exposed a contradiction at the heart of the APC: a party that seeks to impose internal decisions but often lacks the cohesion to enforce them. Saraki’s victory was described by party loyalists as a betrayal, yet it was, paradoxically, a triumph of procedural democracy—he won through a vote, not exclusion.
From Strategy to Structure
Fast forward to 2026, and the dynamics appear reversed. Instead of a candidate outmaneuvering party hierarchy through democratic participation, the hierarchy itself appears to have preempted competition by controlling access.
The endorsement of Governor Dapo Abiodun as a “consensus candidate” for Ogun East raises critical concerns. Consensus, in democratic theory, implies broad agreement among stakeholders. In practice, within the APC, it has increasingly come to mean decisions taken by a select few and presented as collective will.
By preventing Gbenga Daniel from attending the stakeholders’ meeting, the process loses its legitimacy. It shifts from consensus-building to consensus-imposition.
Why This Pattern Persists
There are strategic reasons why such practices continue to define the APC:
1. Power Centralisation (Centralisation of Power)
The APC operates with a strong top-down structure, where key decisions are often made by influential figures rather than through transparent primaries. This allows the party to manage internal conflicts swiftly—but at the cost of inclusivity.
2. Fear of Internal Fragmentation
Experiences like the Saraki episode have made the party wary of open contests that could produce “unpredictable” outcomes. By controlling the process, the leadership seeks to avoid surprises, even if it means sidelining popular figures.
3. Electoral Calculations Over Democratic Ideals
Endorsing sitting governors or powerful incumbents is often seen as a safer electoral strategy. In this case, backing Dapo Abiodun may be viewed as leveraging incumbency and state machinery ahead of 2027.
4. Weak Internal Democratic Institutions
Unlike parties with strong internal electoral systems, the APC has often relied on ad hoc arrangements—consensus lists, stakeholder endorsements, and informal agreements—which are easily manipulated.
READ ALSO:APC Crisis: Gbenga Daniel Barred from Ogun Meeting
The Cost of Exclusion
However, this approach carries significant risks. Political parties are not just vehicles for winning elections; they are institutions meant to aggregate interests and provide fair competition. When aspirants are excluded, grievances deepen, factions harden, and the party’s public image suffers.
Gbenga Daniel is not a fringe figure. As a former governor and sitting senator, his political weight in Ogun East is considerable. Alienating such a figure could have ripple effects—not just within the APC, but across the broader electoral landscape.
A Test of Democratic Credibility
The irony is striking. In 2015, the APC decried Saraki’s emergence as a subversion of party order, even though it followed a democratic vote. In 2026, the party faces criticism for what appears to be the opposite: enforcing order by limiting democratic participation.
Both episodes point to the same unresolved tension—between control and democracy.
As the 2027 elections approach, the APC must decide what kind of party it wants to be. One that manages outcomes behind closed doors, or one that allows open contestation, even at the risk of internal disruption.
The events in Ijebu Ode may seem local, but they echo a national question: can a party that struggles with internal democracy convincingly champion democratic ideals in governance?
Until that question is answered, incidents like the sidelining of Gbenga Daniel will continue to reinforce a narrative the APC can no longer afford to ignore.
Ibrahim Taofeek Kegbegbe is a Lagos-based journalist and public affairs analyst
