Nigeria’s opposition parties have moved beyond preliminary calls for electoral cooperation and agreed to a four-week process aimed at producing a common political framework and, ultimately, a single presidential candidate for the 2027 election.
The agreement emerged from a summit in Abuja convened by the G-100 political pressure group, where six opposition parties endorsed a structure for negotiating their competing interests despite the absence of two of the leading figures associated with the opposition camp, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi.
The parties represented at the meeting were the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), and Social Democratic Party (SDP).
The gathering marked a significant shift from earlier uncertainty over opposition participation. Ahead of the summit, the PDP had said it was unaware of the proposed meeting and was not involved in alliance discussions outside its structures. The party’s position had raised questions over whether the initiative could attract the major political blocs needed to make a single-ticket arrangement viable.
At the Abuja meeting, however, representatives of the PDP and the other participating parties agreed to begin structured negotiations.
The G-100 convener, Salihu Lukman, said the initiative was not designed to compel parties to abandon their identities or force presidential contenders to withdraw immediately. He explained that the first task was to establish rules through which competing interests could be settled.
“It is not asking any party to dissolve. It is not asking any party to disappear into another party. It is not asking any candidate to stand down this morning,” Lukman stated.
Instead, the parties approved three standing bodies: a Central Leadership Committee, a Publicity and Communication Committee, and a Legal Committee. Five working groups will also develop proposals covering a National Covenant for Democratic Renewal, a Single-Term Transition Charter, a National Reform Programme, a Framework for Opposition Unity, and a Roadmap to a Common Presidential Candidate.
The groups have four weeks to complete their assignments before the parties return for another summit to consider their recommendations.
The absence of Atiku and Obi nevertheless leaves a major question over the initiative. A source familiar with the discussions said the former vice-president and the former Anambra State governor were monitoring the process.
Atiku’s media aide, Phrank Shaibu, separately dismissed suggestions that the former vice-president’s absence represented a rejection of opposition cooperation. He said Atiku was “fully aligned” with efforts to build a united opposition ahead of 2027.
Obi’s camp did not provide an official explanation for his absence.
The difficulty facing the negotiations is rooted in the ambitions of several opposition politicians who have already positioned themselves for the presidential contest. The source familiar with the discussions pointed to the reported political calculations around an Obi-Rabiu Kwankwaso alliance as one factor that could complicate the search for a consensus ticket.
The G-100 is seeking to avoid the vote fragmentation that characterised the 2023 presidential election, when opposition votes were divided among several major contenders.
Lukman said the opposition collectively obtained about 13 million votes in that election but failed to convert the figure into victory because the votes were split.
“Nobody stole 13m votes. We divided them ourselves, in public, and we did it knowing exactly what the consequence would be,” he said.
Former Cross River State governor Donald Duke, one of the presidential candidates at the summit, offered a pledge that could ease one part of the negotiations. He said he would support whoever eventually emerged from the process, regardless of whether he secured the ticket himself.
“We will support any political party that emerges in 2027,” Duke said.
The G-100 also proposed a four-year transition arrangement under its planned Single-Term Transition Charter, although the summit did not spell out how such an arrangement would operate or whether constitutional changes would be required.
For the opposition, the immediate test is no longer simply whether its parties can gather in the same room. The four-week negotiation period will determine whether politicians with established ambitions can accept a common procedure for choosing a presidential candidate.
Lukman acknowledged the cost of such a bargain, saying: “There is no version of this that costs nobody anything. Someone in this hall will have to accept an outcome he/she did not want.”
The next summit, therefore, is likely to be more consequential than Monday’s gathering. The parties now have a defined timetable, committees, and policy proposals to consider. What they must still settle is the most difficult question: who, among the opposition’s competing presidential hopefuls, can command enough support to carry a single ticket into the 2027 election?
