…Party members warn of internal crisis as concerns mount over grassroots participation, sidelining of LGA executives, and election preparedness
By Our Correspondent
A fresh wave of discontent is reportedly brewing within the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) in Ajeromi-Ifelodun Local Government Area of Lagos State over allegations that a three-member caucus has concentrated influence over key party activities, sidelined established structures and restricted the participation of other members in critical decisions ahead of the forthcoming elections.
Some party members who spoke on the development expressed concern that the alleged concentration of power could undermine internal democracy, weaken party cohesion and frustrate efforts to build a formidable grassroots political structure.
They warned that unless the grievances are addressed, the situation could become a major source of division and potentially undermine the party’s electoral prospects in the area.
However, the party’s leadership has dismissed the suggestion that the relationship among the individuals concerned amounts to clique politics, describing it instead as a product of experience and longstanding political cooperation.
Chairman: ‘Experience, Not Clique Politics’
Responding to the allegations in a recent interview, the party chairman, Charles Chidiebere Ejimadu aka Dede Barnz, dismissed claims that a small group of politicians who had moved together from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the Labour Party, then the African Democratic Congress (ADC), and now the NDC, was dominating the party’s affairs.
According to the chairman, what critics describe as a clique is simply a team whose members have worked together over time and developed mutual trust and understanding.
“Experience matters. When people have worked together for years, they understand one another’s strengths and weaknesses. That does not stop new members from joining us or contributing meaningfully,” he said.
Despite the chairman’s explanation, increasing complaints attributed to some party members suggest that concerns over influence, lack of consultation and participation remain unresolved and potentially going to be the party’s greatest undoing at the forthcoming election season.
One aggrieved member from Constituency 01 alleged that the caucus was confusing its influence over the party’s House of Representatives candidate with ownership of both the candidate and the party.
“These people appear to believe that they own the House of Representatives candidate and, by extension, the party. But they seem to have forgotten that party members and voters are the real kings when it comes to elections,” the member said.
The member warned that no candidate or political group could secure electoral victory through the efforts of a handful of individuals alone or would they be waiting on election day to handout peanuts and get their votes.
“You need the commitment of party members, the cooperation of the various organs and the confidence of the electorate. When people feel excluded, their enthusiasm naturally begins to decline,” the member added.
LGA Executives Raise Concerns Over Election Planning
The reported discontent appears to extend beyond individual party members, with sources within the local government executive alleging that the administrative structure has been sidelined in most important aspects of political planning.
According to the sources, activities and decisions relating to election preparations are allegedly being channelled through zonal structures without adequate consultation with the LGA leadership.
They further claimed that discussions on the planning and deployment of party agents had not been brought before them for meaningful deliberation.
The sources also alleged that since their inauguration, the executives had neither held a substantive meeting on their responsibilities nor received specific assignments to guide their activities.
If substantiated, the allegations could raise questions about coordination, accountability and the division of responsibilities among the party’s various structures in Ajeromi-Ifelodun.
Effective election planning requires clear communication and cooperation among local government executives, ward leaders, zonal representatives, candidates and other stakeholders. Where these structures operate without adequate consultation, gaps in mobilisation and election-day coordination could emerge.
The complaints also raise a broader question about whether the reported difficulties stem solely from the influence of a small caucus or reflect deeper organisational weaknesses within the party.
Implications for the NDC’s Electoral Prospects
Beyond the immediate feelings of estrangements by party members, the situation presents several potential risks for the NDC as it seeks to consolidate its presence in Ajeromi-Ifelodun.
First, declining morale among party members could weaken grassroots mobilisation. Members who feel excluded from decision-making may become less enthusiastic about attending meetings, canvassing for votes and participating in campaign activities.
Second, poor coordination among party organs could undermine election preparedness. Campaigns depend on effective communication, clearly assigned responsibilities and cooperation among the various levels of party organisation. Disagreements over authority could disrupt these arrangements.
Third, a crisis of confidence in the party’s leadership could deepen internal divisions. Where members believe that decisions are being taken by a privileged few without adequate consultation, resentment may grow and weaken confidence in established party structures.
Fourth, the dispute could affect the political fortunes of the party’s House of Representatives candidate. If disagreements over influence and campaign management become associated with the candidate’s political camp, sections of the party may feel alienated, potentially limiting the candidate’s ability to benefit from the collective strength of the party.
Fifth, internal disputes could divert attention from voter engagement. Rather than concentrating on residents’ concerns, community outreach and the development of effective campaign strategies, party leaders could find themselves preoccupied with resolving internal disagreements.
There is also the possibility that unresolved grievances could produce parallel decision-making, conflicting instructions and competing centres of authority during the campaign.
These are potential consequences, not inevitable outcomes. Much will depend on how the party’s leadership responds to the complaints and whether the concerns can be resolved through dialogue and clearly defined procedures.
Reconciliation or Deeper Division?
The reported crisis presents the NDC leadership in Ajeromi-Ifelodun with an opportunity to review its internal arrangements before existing disagreements become more entrenched.
An inclusive meeting involving the local government executives, zonal representatives, ward leaders, the House of Representatives candidate and other relevant stakeholders could provide a starting point for addressing the concerns.
Such an engagement would allow the parties to clarify responsibilities, establish effective channels of consultation and agree on a coordinated approach to election planning, including the deployment of party agents and grassroots mobilisation.
The leadership may also need to clarify the status and mandate of the reported caucus, including how its activities relate to the authority and responsibilities of the party’s recognised organs.
Where legitimate grievances exist, an impartial internal dispute-resolution mechanism could help prevent allegations and counter-allegations from escalating into a damaging factional struggle.
Equally important is the need to hear from the three individuals reportedly associated with the caucus, as well as the House of Representatives candidate and other relevant party leaders. Their responses would help establish a fuller picture of the dispute.
A Warning the Party Cannot Afford to Ignore
For a party seeking to strengthen its electoral presence in Ajeromi-Ifelodun, internal cohesion and effective grassroots organisation may prove just as important as its campaign message.
The allegations of excessive influence by a small group, coupled with claims that the local government executive is being bypassed in election planning, warrant careful examination by the party’s leadership.
No caucus, candidate or executive can guarantee electoral success independently. Political parties depend on the collective commitment of their members, credible leadership, effective organisation and the confidence of voters.
The NDC must therefore confront the central question raised by the reported discontent: are its internal arrangements broadening participation and strengthening party structures, or are they creating a sense of exclusion that could weaken the organisation from within?
Ultimately, electoral success will depend on the choices voters make at the ballot box. Before then, however, the party has an opportunity to address its internal challenges through consultation, transparency and institutional discipline.
For the NDC in Ajeromi-Ifelodun, the message is clear: a party may be managed by a few, but it cannot command the confidence of the many if its members feel shut out.
