For the second time in barely one month, I return to the internal politics of the All Progressives Congress in Imo State because the party has, once again, handed political observers enough combustible material to interrogate its future. The last time, the central question was whether the primaries would merely become a ceremonial affirmation of predetermined outcomes after Governor Hope Uzodimma’s unmistakable body language at the stakeholders’ meeting held at Government House, Owerri. At that gathering, Uzodimma had clearly laid out three parameters for ticket allocation: zoning, loyalty to party, and competence. Yet, among the three, the Charter of Equity towered above every other consideration because it was the first real attempt to operationalize an arrangement that had long existed more as a political slogan than a tested doctrine.
To be fair, there is nothing inherently wrong with the Charter of Equity still being in its experimental phase. Political doctrines are not born mature; they evolve through application, contradictions, and resistance. What many people forget is that the Charter is fundamentally still an APC political instrument, not an constitutional covenant in Imo State. Opposition politicians praise it only when it advances their strategic mischief and denounce it the moment it threatens their interests. But whatever anyone may say, the primaries offered the clearest evidence yet that Uzodimma intended to give the Charter practical meaning. The brutal political takedown of fourth-term seeking Chike Okafor and third-term seeking Mariam Onuoha sent a powerful message that zoning was no longer going to remain decorative rhetoric.
That was why many applauded the governor for appearing willing to sacrifice entrenched political heavyweights on the altar of rotational justice. In a state where incumbents often behave like political landlords who inherit offices permanently, the decision created the impression that the APC wanted to institutionalize internal balancing. Suddenly, Uzodimma looked like a leader determined to subordinate personal alliances to a broader political architecture. Even critics grudgingly admitted that the Charter had moved from theoretical abstraction to visible implementation. But then came the controversy surrounding the Owerri Senatorial ticket, and the applause quickly gave way to uneasy murmurs.
The emergence of Alex Mbata as the APC senatorial candidate immediately triggered some queer and funny questions. Many wondered why Owerri North, particularly the OAU political bloc, should simultaneously produce both the House of Representatives candidate, Tochukwu Okere, and the senatorial candidate. On the surface, the optics appeared awkward and seemingly inconsistent with the spirit of equitable distribution. Understandably, critics saw a contradiction.But what they forget is that politics is rarely governed by simplistic arithmetic. I do not believe zoning alone determined Mbata’s emergence. If anything, his emergence revealed that Uzodimma’s political calculations extend beyond Zonal balancing into the more practical terrain of loyalty, durability, and electoral viability.
Mbata’s candidacy is historically significant. He has now become perhaps the first politician in Imo political history to secure a ruling party’s senatorial ticket back-to-back. That is not an ordinary political feat. It indicates institutional trust. It also suggests that the APC leadership believes he possesses the capacity to break the longstanding jinx of the party’s inability to firmly capture Owerri Senate seat since the party’s inception in 2014.Beyond sentiment, Mbata remained steadfast to the party even after political disappointment. In Nigerian politics, where defections happen with the speed of changing shirts, loyalty has become a scarce political currency. Uzodimma appears determined to reward that consistency.
Expectedly, the Ngor Okpala bloc mounted enormous pressure for the ticket. But politics is not therapy; disappointment is part of democratic competition. Even Chijioke Kaduru, who stood virtually as the sole visible aspirant from that axis, eventually conceded. So the persistent outrage from some quarters now appears less about injustice and more about frustrated expectations. Political negotiations do not always produce outcomes that satisfy every bloc simultaneously. The APC merely chose what it considered its strongest strategic card. Whether that calculation ultimately pays off electorally is another matter entirely.
What I find intellectually dishonest, however, is the argument that Owerri Federal Constituency has automatically excluded itself from the 2027 governorship succession equation simply because the senate ticket landed there. That reasoning is politically lazy. The Senate and the governorship are not interchangeable political commodities. They obey different dynamics, different calculations, and different strategic imperatives. To conflate both is to misunderstand how power transitions occur in politics in Nigeria. Governorship succession is driven less by simplistic zoning arithmetic and more by trust networks, political chemistry, institutional control, and the personal comfort level of the outgoing governor with potential successors.
And from close observation, it is increasingly evident that Uzodimma’s eventual successor will most likely be someone with whom he shares an organic political relationship, not merely someone who satisfies whatever agitation. Interestingly, one of the individuals fitting that profile appears to come from Owerri Federal Constituency, Owerri municipal to be precise.That alone weakens the emotional blackmail currently being deployed by those insisting the area has been politically “settled.” Politics does not function like a completed inheritance document. Circumstances evolve. Alliances shift. New realities emerge. Anybody prematurely writing off Owerri Federal Constituency from the governorship race may ultimately discover they misread the governor’s deeper political instincts.
Still, the primaries exposed troubling inconsistencies the APC in Imo cannot casually dismiss. The emergence of figures like House Of Assembly principal officers, Kanayo Onyemaechi and Amara Chyna Iwuanyanwu raised uncomfortable questions about the selective application of equity. If zoning could disqualify some long-serving politicians, why did it appear flexible in other cases? In places like Owerri West, there were loud complaints that zoning principles were sidestepped entirely. This selective morality is precisely what weakens political doctrines in Nigeria. Once principles become elastic depending on whose interests are involved, cynicism inevitably follows. Nevertheless, parties reserve the right to make strategic exceptions, even when such exceptions appear politically inconvenient.
Then came the curious reappearance of political veterans like Ifeanyi Araraume and Rochas Okorocha in the senatorial contests. Frankly, one struggles to understand the strategic logic behind those ambitions. How exactly did Okorocha imagine he could successfully seize a ticket from a governor who presently controls the party machinery in the state? If the roles were reversed during Okorocha’s era as governor, would he have tolerated such an insurrection? Politics may accommodate ambition, but it also demands realism. Both Okorocha and Araraume appeared to be contesting battles whose outcomes were already structurally determined before the first ballot was cast.
Ultimately, the APC must resist the dangerous illusion that winning primaries automatically translates into electoral victory. Internal triumph can sometimes conceal deeper vulnerabilities. The party now faces the Herculean responsibility of reconciling bruised interests, calming wounded egos, and preventing silent sabotage from displaced political actors. Uzodimma recently declared that there would be no “hostile takeover” of the South-East in 2027. Strong words. But political declarations are easy; sustaining party cohesion amid competing ambitions is the real test.
.
