Tinubu, Atiku, Obi, Others Lack Ideological Roots, Says Sule Lamido

Former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido has criticised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi and other prominent Nigerian politicians, accusing them of lacking firm ideological foundations and contributing to the instability affecting the country’s political system.

Lamido’s criticism has renewed debate about the ideological direction of Nigeria’s political parties, the frequent movement of politicians between parties and the extent to which political competition is driven by clearly defined principles rather than personal ambition.

The former governor’s position comes as political leaders and parties intensify their preparations for the 2027 general election, with questions surrounding opposition alliances, presidential ambitions and party loyalty increasingly shaping the political landscape.

Lamido Questions the Ideological Foundation of Nigerian Politics

At the centre of Lamido’s criticism is the argument that Nigeria’s political system lacks the consistent ideological commitments needed to build strong institutions and establish clear differences between political parties.

Ideology helps define a political party’s position on economic management, social welfare, education, security, governance and the distribution of public resources. It also provides voters with a basis for assessing whether a party’s policies remain consistent across elections and changes in leadership.

When politicians move between parties without clearly explaining the principles behind their decisions, voters may find it difficult to distinguish one political platform from another.

Such movements can also weaken party structures, disrupt long-term planning and encourage political calculations based primarily on electoral advantage.

Lamido’s criticism therefore raises an important question about whether Nigeria’s major political parties represent distinct policy alternatives or function largely as platforms through which politicians pursue their ambitions for elected office.

Party Defections and the Crisis of Political Identity

Frequent defections have remained a notable feature of Nigerian politics, with politicians sometimes abandoning one party for another ahead of elections or following disagreements over nominations, leadership and political appointments.

Although freedom of political association is a legitimate democratic principle, repeated movements between parties can create uncertainty about the values and commitments that guide political leaders.

A politician who changes parties may have genuine reasons for doing so, including disagreements over policy, internal democracy or the direction of the organisation. However, when such decisions are not accompanied by clear explanations, they can reinforce public perceptions that political loyalty is often determined by personal interest.

The challenge extends beyond individual politicians. Political parties must establish internal democratic processes, transparent nomination procedures and policy frameworks capable of surviving changes in leadership.

Without these foundations, party membership risks becoming a temporary arrangement rather than a meaningful commitment to a shared political programme.

Tinubu, Atiku and Obi in the 2027 Political Contest

Lamido’s remarks carry particular significance because Tinubu, Atiku and Obi occupy prominent positions in discussions about Nigeria’s next presidential election.

Tinubu, the incumbent president and leader of the ruling political establishment, faces the task of defending his administration’s record while seeking renewed public support. His economic reforms, security policies and ability to improve living conditions are likely to remain central to public debate.

Atiku, a former vice president and leading opposition figure, must demonstrate that his political platform offers a credible alternative to the current administration. His challenge includes building a broad coalition, communicating clear policy proposals and persuading voters that his approach would produce better outcomes.

Obi, the former Anambra State governor, has also remained a significant figure in the opposition debate. His political appeal has been associated with demands for accountable government, prudent public spending and improved economic management.

However, the prominence of these politicians does not, by itself, establish whether their political programmes possess strong ideological foundations. That assessment requires a closer examination of their policies, consistency, party commitments and records in public office.

The broader question is whether the parties and candidates can articulate distinct visions for Nigeria and demonstrate how those visions would translate into practical improvements for citizens.

Why Political Ideology Matters to Democracy

A strong ideological foundation can help political parties establish continuity between their campaign promises and their actions in government.

For example, a party that prioritises social investment should be able to explain how it intends to finance education, healthcare and social protection. A party that promotes private-sector-led growth should outline the regulatory and economic policies it would pursue to encourage investment and employment.

Likewise, parties that emphasise social justice, economic equality or national development should demonstrate how those principles inform their budgets, legislative proposals and public policies.

Ideology does not mean that political parties must remain rigid or refuse to adapt to changing circumstances. Effective governance often requires compromise and adjustments in response to economic realities.

The essential distinction is between a party that modifies its policies for clearly explained reasons and one that abandons its stated principles whenever political convenience demands it.

For voters, ideological clarity makes it easier to compare candidates, evaluate their promises and hold them accountable after elections.

The Consequences for Governance and Public Trust

Weak party identity can have consequences beyond election campaigns. When political organisations are built primarily around influential individuals, internal disagreements may become personal struggles for control rather than debates over policy.

This can affect candidate selection, legislative priorities and the ability of parties to maintain coherent positions on national issues.

It may also weaken public confidence in democratic institutions, particularly when politicians who previously criticised an administration later join its ranks without explaining the reasons for the change.

Nevertheless, party defections should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of ideological failure. Political circumstances differ, and some movements may reflect genuine disagreements or efforts to promote democratic accountability.

The important consideration is whether politicians communicate their reasons transparently and whether their subsequent actions remain consistent with the principles they claim to support.

Political parties also bear responsibility for building institutions that encourage debate, tolerate internal disagreement and establish clear standards for public office.

What Nigerian Voters Should Demand Ahead of 2027

As preparations for the next general election continue, voters have an opportunity to move the political conversation beyond personalities, endorsements and party rivalries.

Candidates should be pressed to explain their positions on unemployment, inflation, education, healthcare, electricity, insecurity and public-sector accountability. They should also provide measurable proposals and clarify how their programmes would be funded and implemented.

Political parties, for their part, should publish coherent policy platforms and demonstrate how their candidates intend to translate campaign promises into legislation and administrative action.

Voters should also examine the records of candidates who have previously held public office. Their decisions, achievements, shortcomings and responses to criticism can provide useful evidence when assessing their suitability for future responsibilities.

Such scrutiny would help make elections more competitive in substance, rather than allowing political contests to revolve exclusively around personalities and shifting alliances.

Sule Lamido’s criticism of Tinubu, Atiku, Obi and other prominent politicians has brought renewed attention to the question of ideological commitment in Nigeria’s democracy.

His remarks highlight a broader concern about party defections, political identity and the relationship between personal ambition and public service.

Ultimately, the strength of Nigeria’s democracy will depend not only on the number of political parties competing for power but also on their ability to develop credible programmes, uphold internal democracy and remain accountable to voters.

As the 2027 election approaches, Nigerians will have to assess whether the competing candidates offer genuinely different approaches to governance and whether their stated principles are supported by their records and policy proposals.

The central challenge for the political class is to demonstrate that political competition is about more than securing office. It must also be about ideas, institutions and practical solutions to the problems confronting the country.

By Joseph Iyaji