By Kris Ayanruoh
Once the dominant force in Nigerian politics, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) now wears the mantle of opposition – a role it seems unable, or perhaps unwilling, to fully embrace. For nearly a decade, it has oscillated between moments of fiery criticism and long stretches of political inertia, raising the question: does the PDP stand for anything beyond reclaiming power?
Without a clear ideological compass, burdened by recycled leadership, plagued by internal contradictions, and unable to rein in members who openly undermine it, the party risks becoming less a credible alternative and more a political waiting room for power seekers. In a democracy that desperately needs principled opposition, the PDP’s performance, ideals, and the calibre of its members deserve a closer, unflinching examination.
I. Performance as an Opposition
The PDP’s transition from ruling party (1999–2015) to opposition after the 2015 elections was abrupt and jarring. Having enjoyed sixteen uninterrupted years in power, the party entered opposition without a coherent strategy for holding the All Progressives Congress (APC) accountable. Its early years in opposition were marked by factional disputes, court battles over leadership, and an identity crisis.
Although the PDP has occasionally mounted strong challenges – such as raising alarm over electoral irregularities, questioning government handling of insecurity, and opposing unpopular economic policies—these interventions have often appeared reactive rather than strategic. The absence of a sustained policy agenda has left the party struggling to define itself as more than the anti-APC camp.
In the National Assembly, PDP lawmakers have at times played an important role in scrutinizing budgets and policy proposals. Yet, they have also been accused of cutting backroom deals and supporting measures they previously condemned while in government. Such inconsistencies have weakened the party’s credibility as a watchdog over the ruling administration.
II. Ideals: Does the PDP Stand for Anything?
On paper, the PDP claims to be a centre-right party committed to national unity, economic development, and democratic governance. Its founding documents speak of social justice, equity, and inclusiveness. In practice, however, the party’s actions often blur ideological lines.
Unlike opposition parties in mature democracies that anchor themselves in clear ideological traditions – progressive, conservative, socialist – the PDP has been more of a broad coalition of interests. While this “big tent” approach helped it win elections during its ruling years, it has proven a liability in opposition, making it difficult to craft consistent policy positions or rally around shared principles.
This absence of a strong ideological identity fuels public perception that the PDP is less about advancing a vision for Nigeria and more about regaining control of the state apparatus. Without a defining philosophy, the party risks being overshadowed by issue-based movements and newer political actors who are unafraid to stake out clear positions.
III. Quality of Membership, Leadership, and Discipline
The calibre of PDP’s members and leaders remains a sticking point in its quest for relevance. Since 2015, its top ranks have been dominated by familiar political figures – many of whom bear responsibility for the governance failures that contributed to its electoral defeat. The recycling of leadership has done little to inspire confidence in the party’s ability to offer fresh solutions.
Worse still, the party has shown a chronic inability to discipline erring members whose actions undermine its credibility. The most glaring example is former Rivers State governor and current minister, Nyesom Wike, who openly challenged the party’s presidential ticket, defied its leadership, and even worked at cross-purposes during the last general election – without facing decisive sanctions. Such tolerance of open insubordination sends a clear message: loyalty to the party is optional.
Compounding this is the disconcerting rush of PDP members to decamp to the APC or, in some cases, to publicly endorse President Bola Ahmed Tinubu while still formally in the PDP. This willingness to abandon the party – or cozy up to its chief rival – for personal advantage underscores the depth of opportunism within its ranks. It also erodes public confidence that the PDP can stand united on any national issue.
Internal democracy remains weak, with candidate selections frequently marred by imposition, vote-buying, and factional disputes. High-profile defections to and from the APC have raised doubts about members’ commitment to the party’s supposed ideals, reinforcing the view that Nigerian politics is driven more by personal ambition than collective vision.
One of the most polarizing figures within the PDP is Atiku Abubakar. A perennial presidential candidate, Atiku’s relentless pursuit of the presidency – often at the expense of forging unity – has deepened internal rifts. Many within and outside the party view his repeated bids not as a reflection of party strategy, but as a personal mission, sometimes subordinating the PDP’s long-term interests to his own political aspirations.
At the grassroots level, there are pockets of energetic, reform-minded young politicians within the PDP. However, they are often sidelined by entrenched political elites who view the party as their personal property. Without generational renewal and a deliberate effort to empower credible new voices, the PDP risks alienating younger voters and losing relevance in an evolving political landscape.
IV. Case Studies of Opposition in Action
There have been moments when the PDP demonstrated glimpses of effective opposition. For instance, its resistance to certain electoral bill provisions sparked national debate and helped mobilize civil society groups. Its criticism of economic policy missteps has occasionally forced the APC to clarify or revise certain programs.
However, for each of these moments, there are counterexamples where PDP members have contradicted their party’s official stance or failed to take decisive action. Whether on fuel subsidy removal, constitutional reforms, or security legislation, the PDP’s response has often been fractured, diluted by internal divisions and conflicting ambitions.
V. The Road Ahead: Redemption or Irrelevance?
If the PDP is to remain relevant, it must first define what it stands for in clear, actionable terms. Nigerians need more than rhetoric – they need to see consistent policy proposals that address insecurity, unemployment, infrastructure decay, and national unity.
The party must also rebuild its internal structures to enforce discipline and uphold party supremacy. Members cannot be allowed to openly sabotage the party’s electoral chances or endorse rival candidates without consequences. At the same time, it must move beyond personality-driven politics by developing leadership pipelines that prioritize competence and integrity over personal ambition.
Finally, the PDP must embrace the role of opposition not just as a platform for criticizing government, but as a space for policy innovation, citizen engagement, and democratic strengthening. In a country facing complex socio-economic challenges, an opposition party that merely waits for the ruling party to fail is no opposition at all.
Conclusion
The PDP stands at a critical juncture. It can either continue as a hollow political vessel—dominated by personal ambitions, crippled by internal indiscipline, and devoid of coherent ideals – or it can reinvent itself into a principled, credible alternative capable of shaping Nigeria’s democratic future. The choice lies with its leaders, its members, and ultimately, the Nigerian people who will decide whether the PDP is a party poised for redemption—or a relic of the past waiting for its final curtain call.
Kris Ayanruoh, DBA
