In this interview on Trust TV’s 30 Minutes programme, Comrade Salihu Lukman — former National Vice Chairman (North) of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and now a key figure in the emerging coalition opposing President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s 2027 re-election — offers his assessment of the recent wave of endorsements for Tinubu and APC governors, and sheds light on the coalition’s strategy ahead of the next general election.

What do you make of what is happening in your former party? We’ve seen members recently lining up behind the president and, in many states, pushing for automatic tickets for sitting governors and possibly National Assembly members.

Well, I think it confirms that the party has lost its bearings beyond repair. If you recall, the APC came in on the promise of change. That message resonated with Nigerians because there was a widespread problem of imposition—particularly in the PDP at the time. That issue became almost a political culture across all parties.

People would buy nomination forms for internal primaries, and before they even got to the venue, the “winner” had already been announced. When we came with the promise of change, that was the fundamental reason we considered ourselves progressive.

Those of us who were there at the founding of the APC genuinely believed we were building a progressive party. And for any true progressive, the first principle is a strong relationship with the people—your constituents. That means internal contests shouldn’t be a problem at all.

If you remember the APC primaries in 2014, to be fair, they were properly conducted. The winners—whether for the House of Assembly or the presidency—emerged through the party process.

Of course, some of the same problems we sought to correct had long roots. Even from 1999, there were many allegations, including claims that party leaders collected ridiculous sums of money. We managed those issues to some extent and met public expectations for a while.

But by 2019, things began to deteriorate, and allegations against party leaders started surfacing again—allegations of huge amounts of money being collected. Some of the scandals, like the one in Zamfara, were almost like fairy tales. That’s why many of us began agitating internally for the party to return to its founding vision.

If you recall, that internal agitation led to the dissolution of the National Working Committee under Comrade Adams Oshiomhole. A caretaker committee was then appointed—initially for just six months—under the Yobe State governor. But before we knew it, that committee too had become business as usual. They began manipulating

things, extending their tenure, and were almost set to conduct the party’s primary elections themselves until people rose up against them.

When the leadership led by Senator Abdullahi Adamu came in, the expectation was that we would stabilise and begin correcting things. But again, it became business as usual.

So, is there something about ruling parties that inevitably turns them into this?

Well, part of it is that people who find themselves in leadership positions within the ruling party deliberately choose to continue with business as usual. They start selecting candidates based on transactions, not merit. That’s what led us to fight the attempt to impose Senator Ahmad Lawan as the so-called consensus candidate in the last election.

We had confidence that Asiwaju, being the beneficiary of that resistance and someone with a track record in progressive politics, would step in and help redirect the party to its founding ideals.

But instead, what did we see? From day one, Asiwaju started on the wrong foot. First, there was the struggle to remove Senator Adamu and Senator Iyiola Omisore. I was at the centre of that, and I know for a fact that we had the opportunity to discuss the matter with people close to President Tinubu. So, I can say confidently that he was aware and endorsed it.

But what do you expect of the president, given that Senator Abdullahi Adamu and the others did not support his candidature?

No, that’s not the point. I personally led the agitation to get Abdullahi Adamu out. And after that was achieved, I expected the president to respect the party’s internal agreement, which—according to our constitution—stipulated that the position of national chairman should remain with Nasarawa State.

Instead, he redirected it to the North-West. And I was the national vice chairman for the North-West, so I can tell you categorically: no party leader from the zone was consulted on that decision. We just heard that the president had decided on Dr Abdullahi Umar Ganduje.

I’ve said it publicly—I don’t hide my views. If the North-West had been given a free hand to select the national chairman, and you ranked all potential candidates, Ganduje might not even make the top five. He’d be around tenth, at best. But regardless, he was imposed.

Even after that, I had to leave, because I couldn’t live with that kind of imposition. So, I left the leadership of the party. But I continued to engage, saying, “Look, this is what needs to be done.”

I even had the opportunity to meet Dr Ganduje and said, “OK, now that you’re the national chairman, the reality is this: if you continue on this path, you will be humiliated—you’ll be reduced to a beggar.” I made my recommendations clearly.

Are the party leaders now lining up behind the president to ingratiate themselves? No opposition, no dissent—just anointed candidacy?

That’s the disappointing part of it. People have no regard for history. You can stage all the endorsements you want; it won’t stop others from doing what they believe is right.

Are you saying that there must still be primaries closer to the general election?

Yes. Many of us saw this coming. Even after leaving the party, I said we’re going back to the trenches—we’ll start organising, because we can already see what’s unfolding.

The APC government hasn’t just weakened its own internal structures—it’s also going after the opposition. That’s why the PDP is in perpetual crisis. The Labour Party too. And the reality is, if things continue this way, we’ll get to 2027 and most of these parties won’t even be in a position to field credible candidates.

That’s why we’ve started wide consultations—serious discussions. And through those consultations, we’ve identified the available options, and frankly, they are straightforward.

Before we get to those options, let’s stay a bit longer on the ruling party. Do you see any saving grace? Or is this just a contrived process with governors and lawmakers all lining up behind the ruling party? Is there any hope for the country—or for the APC saving itself?

It’s about saving the country now. The APC is in a worse situation than the PDP was in 2014–2015. That’s the hard truth.

As it stands, Asiwaju has already been crowned as the presidential candidate. All serving governors seeking a second term have been handpicked, whether they’ve performed or not. National Assembly members are being offered near-automatic tickets. That’s why I said in another interview that the APC has transformed from a party envisioned as progressive into a monarchy.

Now all you need to do is be in office to be guaranteed a return. But that’s not democracy.

I’ve seen people celebrating their arrests during the pro-democracy struggle—I don’t do that. My arrest wasn’t a badge of honour—it was a reflection of how weak we were at the time. But we were in the trenches. We fought. And we didn’t go through all that only to end up in a system worse than what we faced under Abacha.

At least under Abacha, it was about himself—“who the cap fits.” Others could still contest. But look at where we are now. That’s why we’ve told everyone in the opposition that we can’t fix this without sacrifice.

Why do you think governors are lining up to join the APC? Are they being encouraged, pressured, or do they just see more opportunities there?

My simple answer is this: many of them are not even qualified for the positions they occupy. If they were, they would understand that being governor comes with privileges—privileges that extend beyond their time in office.

Their livelihood and a decent life are guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic. That they’re scrambling like this shows they don’t understand the responsibilities of their office. That office is about service.

But maybe they’re just being “Nigerian politicians.” They can sense how power works here. You have to line up behind whoever controls the federal government to retain your seat. But when you say they’re being real politicians, I must disagree.

They’re being criminal politicians. In fact, they’re acting like political bandits. Why? Because only bandits go and take what doesn’t belong to them.

These are people who were elected for a four-year term. The Constitution—and even their own party’s constitution—requires them to go through primaries before they can be candidates again. But what are they telling you now, and telling their party members?

“You are hereby disarmed. The rights guaranteed to you by the Nigerian Constitution and the party’s constitution no longer exist. We’ve decided. We are the candidates. Asiwaju is our candidate. Take it or leave it.”

That kind of mindset is criminal.

I know I’m using strong words, but if we’re going to restore democracy and hold elected officials accountable, we must tell the hard truth. We must take every step necessary to bring everyone back to the level of accountability to the Nigerian people.

What about the other governors who are still in their parties—the platforms on which they were elected? What kind of pressure do you think they’re under now, given all this talk of one party and everyone lining up behind one leader?

Honestly, I haven’t focused much on that. For many of us, our main focus now is finding people who genuinely understand that this country—and our democracy—is in danger. We’re looking for people who are willing to come together and do what needs to be done.

What is “the needful”?

The needful is that we must all agree to make sacrifices. That’s the first step.

That’s why when people start assuming that certain individuals will be candidates already, we say no—we’re not even at that stage yet. First and foremost, we want to identify people who are willing to be part of a coalition based on shared principles.

If you say you want to join the coalition, we’ll tell you clearly: this is what we stand for. If you have ambitions to run for office, that’s fine—but for now, keep them aside.

The priority is forming the party. As things stand, we don’t even have a party—because all the potential platforms are in danger.

So how far have you gone? Because you’re saying now that, contrary to reports linking you to Party X or Party Y, there is no chosen party yet.

That’s correct. No chosen party yet. As I said, we scanned the political environment and identified two clear options. Our first—and best—option is to register a new party.

At the moment, and it’s no secret, we have already raised that alarm. More than 70 groups have submitted applications to INEC seeking registration. But INEC is sitting on them.

Is it that they haven’t been registered, or are they still being processed?

There is no indication of progress. Many have not even received acknowledgement. By law, once INEC acknowledges your application, and 90 days pass without formal registration, you’re considered registered.

But what’s happening is that even acknowledgements are being withheld. That’s a way of stalling the process, and it undermines the law. INEC is supposed to be an independent body. But it’s all part of the larger problem of state capture, which this administration has perfected. The National Assembly has been muzzled, and INEC is being manipulated—perhaps not overtly, but clearly.

Have you engaged INEC to ask why they aren’t issuing acknowledgements? Could there be a technical explanation?

Many of the groups have been engaging INEC. This isn’t new. The process started more than a year ago—nearly two years. Over 70 applications are just lying there. We’re aware of the risk: that if we file, INEC might simply pile ours with the rest.

But we haven’t given up.

Have you filed an application?

A group is working on it. I’m not sure it has been formally submitted yet. But when it is, the world will know.

So what is your second option?

Our fallback is to identify existing parties willing to submit to a reform process—parties that can be transformed into the kind of political model we envision. We’ve assessed several. SDP, for example, was among those we considered.

Initially, however, their leadership didn’t seem receptive. Many of our conditions involve real structural changes: leadership overhaul, amending the constitution of the party, changing its name and symbol—even its identity.

But isn’t that asking too much, especially as new entrants?

We are not looking for just another party to contest elections. We want something new that reflects today’s political reality—something that won’t disappoint Nigerians again.

Many of us are still traumatised. We were at the heart of the APC project, and it turned out a disaster. We don’t want to repeat that. That’s why we’ve set tough conditions. We’ve made significant progress, and within the next few weeks or months—certainly no more than three months—we should finalise everything.

We’re mindful of the electoral calendar. INEC will likely release guidelines around January or February 2026. Party primaries must happen by May or June that year. So if we’re going to build a party that can present credible candidates, we must act now. It can’t be rushed at the last minute.

But isn’t this all starting too late?

No, we didn’t start late. Maybe the public is only just beginning to see the results. For nearly two years, we’ve been at it—planning, negotiating, organising. People were in denial at first. They questioned the need for a coalition. But now they’re starting to understand.

Still, there’s no firm platform yet. One day it’s SDP, then ADC. Now you’re saying nothing has been decided.

Negotiations are ongoing. It could be SDP, ADC, or another party entirely.

What about PDP?

The PDP is facing an existential crisis. That said, it remains a known brand with grassroots presence. There are PDP leaders genuinely committed to reforming the party.

If they succeed in reclaiming PDP, that’s great. But they must also meet the same conditions we’ve set for others. We won’t just join PDP and continue the same culture of imposition and bad politics.

Isn’t your stance too rigid? Couldn’t it cost you participation in 2027, especially if time runs out?

We’re almost at the finish line. What remains is to finalise agreements on the platform, leadership framework, and structure of the new party.

One of the key figures in this coalition idea, Peter Obi, is reported to have said he plans to run again under Labour Party. Doesn’t that complicate things?

I won’t comment directly. But Labour Party is clearly in danger. The unresolved leadership crisis speaks for itself.

I haven’t heard Obi say that directly. If he did, perhaps he knows something the rest of us don’t. But from my perspective, anyone serious about contesting in 2027 must prepare to confront the existential threats facing all current parties—Labour, PDP, NNPP, all of them.

And I’m not trying to be alarmist. If we fail to present a viable alternative that’s more sophisticated than these existing structures, then we might as well admit that APC has won.

So when you say APC, do you mean the party or Tinubu?

What’s the difference? I’m Saliu Lukman, son of Mohammed Lukman. If you say Lukman has succeeded or Saliu has succeeded, it’s the same.

People say the next election might be about a lifetime presidency. Let them enjoy the fantasy. But once our coalition concludes its negotiations, those fantasies will lose traction in Nigeria’s political landscape.

But things that once seemed impossible are now happening in Nigeria.

True. We used to say Nigeria isn’t a banana republic. But today, we see things that once felt unthinkable.

If someone told me in the 1980s that a Nigerian president could change the national anthem within an hour—and that over 300 lawmakers would go along without protest—I’d have said it was impossible. Yet here we are. (Daily Trust)