OPINION
Ortom’s Second Term and The Task Before Him

As Benue State Governor, Samuel Ortom takes oath of office today to mark the commencement of his second term, our correspondent CHRIS GAGA, examines his first term in office and the expectations of Benue people from his last term as governor.
It was on the 29th May 2015 when governor Samuel Ortom ascended the throne of power as the 5th democratically elected governor of Benue State.
Today makes exactly four years after, and governor Ortom having rewarded a renewed mandate by the sovereign people of Benue State will be taking the oath of allegiance for the second time as executive governor of the food basket state.Of course his reelection by the people of Benue state may be a clear pat on the back and a repose of confidence that the governor has tentatively performed optimally during his first term, after all, reelection into such offices ought to be the collective resolve of the people to reward hard work in terms of performance. Thus, whether this was the basis for his reelection or not, it is probably not the crux of this analogue.
While the event of his inauguration for the second term is historic, many Benue people may rarely see his second term as a time for consolidation, but rather a time for the governor who is said to have performed poorly in his first term to cut his stint in the annals of development of the state. No doubt, the expectations from the Benue masses are high.
Considerably, a cursory throwback on governor Samuel Ortom’s first four years in office becomes key as he renews his oath to occupy the Benue Peoples House in the next four years. This perhaps may give the people insights into what the governor is set to achieve for the state in his last term.
Memorably, the governor in his first term had a developmental blueprint christened, “Our Collective Vision for a greater Benue.” This blueprint had five cardinal areas of focus which encompasses; Agriculture-driven Industrialization, Steamed Based Education, Security, youth empowerment and job creation, and Improved Infrastructure. But while the governor has obviously done well and is applauded in the area of Security, it has remained a tantalizing mirage as to whether any of the other cardinal areas of his blueprint have been implemented even averagely.
Largely, his efforts in tackling insecurity is the greatest achievement of his first term. This is cognitive of the peoples Anti-Open Grazing and Ranches Establishment Law as firmly implemented by his. administration. His amnesty program which yielded minimal impact is never to be left out, same as his dexterity in handling internal and inter-border disputes recently.
Although the governor has listed his achievements in the various sectors of Agriculture, education, health, infrastructure, youth empowerment and employment, his critics and many other Benue citizens say such achievements as highlighted in his scorecard are not feasible. His critics may be fair, they may not.
But while it will be highly unfair for anyone to say the governor has failed woefully in his first term, it is definitely not out of place to say the state deserve better developments than where it is staggering presently.
Positively, the Benue State governor is not unaware of the task ahead of him in his next four years in office. He has admitted repeatedly that costly “mistakes” were made in his first term, but “lessons” have been learnt, and he was ready to relaunch Benue into its pride of place amongst other states in his second coming.
Of course, one of the major problem governor Samuel Ortom promised and was expected to tackle in his first four years, which is the welfare of Benue workers has remained unsolved but rather degenerated. Benue workers are now owed salaries to the tune of 5 months(state), 10 months(Teachers), 11 months(LGs), and over 14 to 18 months(pensions) respectively as against 3 months(state), 4 months (local government) he inherited in 2015.
Investigations also have shown that the first term of governor Ortom administration is alienated from the rural areas. There seems to be little or no government presence at the grassroots, a situation that has caused gross decay in rural infrastructures such as feeder roads, bridges, lack of electrification and other basic amenities in spite of claims that his government has carried out over 800 water projects in the rural areas. Obviously, the 23 local governments of the state deserve better transformation in his second term.
The hopes and expectations are still high even as the governor takes oath of allegiance to mark the commencement of his second term in office. For many, it is time for Samuel Ortom to make the people reposed or redevelop confidence in his government through robust and physically viable developmental projects that tends to transform the state and improve the livelihood of every Benue citizenry.
Expectedly, our Correspondents spoke to some Benue citizens who spoke on their expectations from the second term of governor Samuel Ortom One of them, an elder statesman and former permanent Secretary in the state, Engr. Peter Torjum, expects the governor to take development to the rural areas of the 23 local governments of the state. He also wants the governor to address the issue of welfare of workers and pensioners in the State.
“The governor should take development to the rural areas because his first four years witnessed low presence in the rural areas of the state. So he should focus on the grass roots.
“Let him bring in technocrats who can perform very well so that his second term will not be abysmal. He needs competent hands run his second term. It is key.
“In the area of welfare, I know the salary is regular now, except for the arrears. So he should try to pay we pensioners our wages as at when due, that is most important. And he should then pay some gratuities and pensions arrears. All these things if he pays then we will be very happy and support him to run his second term very well,” Engr Peter Torjum said.
A youth, Mr. Terseer Bamber wants the governor to cash in on agriculture which is the main stead of the people so as to improve the economy of the state.
“The expectations of an average Benue person is development beyond what we have seen in time past. We expect job creation, infrastructural development and most importantly assuming our position in the comparative advantage we have, which is agriculture. In the past four years of Ortom administration, we have not seen these things as Benue youths, come to limelight.
“So my expectations in his next four years is to see him prioritize these areas I have mentioned. First of all, commercializing agriculture, moving to improve infrastructure both within the cosmopolitan centres of the state and the rural areas, and then most importantly paying particular attention to youth employment and empowerment, because if that is not addressed, we are definitely sitting on a time bomb,” Mr. Bamber noted.
Mr. Odaudu Owoicho opined that, “as a Nigerian and an indigene of Benue State, my expectations from Ortom’s first and present administrations have been high. But, like the saying goes: “Expectations Kills”, so, for this singular reason and experiences of poor leadership from the past political administrations, I expect nothing, but if this present leadership led by the Samuel Ortom’s (PDP) gives us a new direction and thought, I will expect nothing but the best. More particularly in the areas of salary payment and augmentation, job creation/youth empowerment amongst other things – industrialisation, infrastructural development and other basic amenities for the wellbeing of the people.”
Another Benue indigene who preferred to be addressed as Martins, said bluntly that governor Ortom has nothing to offer Benue judging by his antecedents in his first term and even others positions.
“GOING BY HIS ANTECEDENTS IN THE THE FIRST TERM, I DON’T EXPECT MUCH FROM HIM, BECAUSE HE HAS SHOWN THAT HE LACKS VISION. This is without sentiments, but as a keen observer, going by his past records, he has nothing to offer Benue.
“I have been a keen observer of Ortom’s leadership right from when he was chairman of Guma local government in the early 90s. He did nothing, I think he is just very good in media propaganda. I see, he has demonstrated incapacity so I can’t expect much from him,” he said.
Miss Annabel Zegeor said she expects alot from Ortom’s second term, but especially welfare of Benue workers and pensioners in the State.
“I expect him to be very focus and particular about salary of workers especially the arrears. People are suffering much. The pensioners are also suffering; he should look into their issue.
“And again I suggest the governor choose new advisers because he couldn’t do well in his first term to be honest. No one knows, the kind of advisers he had then been part of the reasons for his poor performance. So he should take care of that, if he wants to do something.
“For me, even though we are not expecting too much from him, he should at least make Makurdi clean and safe to stay by constructing drainages because when it rains, it is usually difficult for some residents to even cope with the level of water,” she said.
Miss Joy Johnson wants the governor to at least open up some streets in Makurdi to easy movement and make the town look neat.
” I don’t expect too much from the governor. But he should try his best and construct some major streets in Makurdi metropolis. That alone is something,” Joy Johnson noted.
Mr. Benedict Terhemen is of the expectations that the governor will do his best for the state during his second term, having parted ways with his godfather, Senator Akume was which the governor said was his detractor.
“We voted him the first time but he didn’t do the things he promised to do for us, and he said his Godfather was the reason for his poor performance, but thank God the God father is not there again. So we expect that his second term will be different and better unlike his first four years.
“He has not even chosen his cabinet yet, so we expect that he will select those who will truly help him in developing the state, but not selfish persons,” Terhemen noted.
Comrade Cletus Aruta, a youth, expects the governor to emulate his counterparts in the neighboring states of Ebonyi and Enugu states who are far doing well in the area of infrastructure and other things.
“I want His Excellency to continue with the payment of monthly salaries to Benue State, Local Government Workers and Pensioners and clear the backlog of salaries owed to them especially the Pensioners who had served the State meritoriously and now retired with a lot of family responsibilities such as payment of school fees, house rents and feedings.
“Secondly, I want him to use his 2nd Term in office to embark on massive urban and rural infrastructural developments in Benue State like we are seeing from his counterparts in our neigbouring States of Nasarrawa, Enugu and Ebonyi State which Benue State is far behind right now especially the
construction of Aliade-Mbakinde-Obarike Ito and Oju-Awajir roads which he promised Igede people during his first tenure. He should create an enabling environment for Private enterprises to come and invest in Benue State as almost all minerals and raw materials in Benue State are wasting and untapped into finished goods which will in turns create job opportunities for Benue youth and curbs youth unemployment and insecurity in the state.
“Finally, I want him to use his second term to build and equip our Public Primary and Secondary Schools with the State of Arts facilities such as good class room blocks and toilets, Libraries and provision of Chairs and desks and other office equipment as you know how important is Primary and
Secondary education which are the foundation of learnings and child development,” Aruta said.
For every Benue citizenry, there is a basket full of expectations and they are quite high, but interestingly, governor Samuel Ortom is not unaware of the dilemma before him.
Perhaps, his first four years were laced with excuses, mistakes and administrative blunders, but of course none of such feeble excuses may be entertained by the sovereign people of Benue State that refrained contemplating his replacement even against all odds during the 2019 elections.
The public outcry is alarming. Yes, not very many may have had it juicy during his first term, but the decision of the people to retain governor Ortom is a thunderous statement that, he the governor should not be taken for granted.
The people want good infrastructures such as good roads, schools, hospitals. The state desire industries, factories that can process their fruits, yam, etc, thus investment is what should be encouraged. The rural dwellers are cut off from the scheme of things, they yearn for feeder roads to help convey their farm produce to the markets.
The governor must understand that Agriculture remains our main stead and as such explore every opportunity available especially facilities provided by the federal government to encourage and transform the agricultural sector as well as generate revenue for the state. If possible, as the food basket state, the people expects the governor to romance with the federal government which is channeling huge resources into the agricultural sector with the aim of driving the policy and making the proceeds available for the development of the state.
The welfare of the people as it concerns their wages is an over trashed issue which the governor should deal with without any backslide. It is also instructive to urge the governor to consolidate on his gains in the area of Security through firm implementation of the Open Grazing Prohibition and Ranches Establishment Law already in use. This as many others believe may put a permanent end to the incessant clashes. This is not forgetting the many Benue citizens who are victims of the invasion and have been suffering in various IDPs camps. It is a necessity for the governor to liaise with the Federal government to make sure that these innocent people return to their homes in safety as soon as he settles for his second term.
It is indeed an epoch-making event as the fifth democratically elected governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom renews his vow. But as he commences his second term, may his conscience be pricked to live a legacy befitting the goodwill the people have shown him, may he aim for success, and may he not disappoint the confidence bestowed on him. May the governor summon unusual courageous and be focus in implementing his developmental blueprint, “Our Collective vision for a greater Benue”. He may have meager resources at his disposal, but prudent and careful management and appropriation of such resources will do the State a great deal indeed.
OPINION
President Bola Tinubu: Establish a National Bureau for Ethnic Relations and Inter Group Unity

By Wilfred Uji
I once wrote an article based on a thorough research that all the states of North Central of Nigeria, Kwara, Niger, Kogi, Benue, Plateau and Nasarawa States, share a great deal of historical relations, resources, ethnicity and intergroup relations. These states have a common shared boarders with common security challenges that can only be effectively managed and resolved from a regional perspective and framework.
The exercise at the creation of states have overtime drawn arbitrary boundaries which in contemporary times are critical security and developmental issues that affects the sub region.
Firstly is the knowledge and teaching of history that can help grow and promote a regional unity and intergroup relations.
As far back as the pre-colonial era, the North Central of Nigeria had a plethora of multi ethnic groups which co-existed within the framework of mutual dependence exploiting indigenous peace initiatives. The diverse ethnic groups comprising of Nupe, Gwari, Gbagi, Eggon, Igala, Idoma, Jukun, Alago, Tiv, Gwanadara, Birom, Tarok, Angas, etc were independent state sovereignties before the advent of British colonial rule by the first quarter of the twentieth century.
Secoundly that British colonialism for economic and political exigencies almagamated all these ethnic groups under the Northern Region with headquarters first at Lokoja and later moved to Kaduna.
The indirect rule policy placed all the traditional political chiefdoms of the sub region under the political supervision, for the convience of taxation and draft labor, under the Sokoto Caliphate.
The indirect rule political structure was not intended to be a game changer that would enforce the dominance and hegemony of the Sokoto Caliphate over the people, land and resources of the sub region.
Thirdly, in the realization of the above, the British colonial state first created the Munchi Province and later the Benue Province as a political and state framework that could accommodate all the ethnic diversity of some of the North Central people.
State creation which ought to allow room for minority representation and expression, over time, has been turned upside down, by some ethnic groups as a vehicle of the exclusion of some minority groups.
For instance, the creation of Benue State in 1976 and Nasarawa State in 1996, does not signify and imply the exclusion of the Tiv and Idoma from Nasarawa State as well as the exclusion of the Alago and Jukun from Benue State.
These ethnic groups, long before state creation, had indigenous roots in all the states of the North Central of Nigeria. Historically, it is misleading and erroneous for these ethnic nationalities to be regarded as tenant settlers in the states where they are located.
The term tenant settlers have been used by the ruling political class of some states of the North Central of Nigeria as a staging point for land grabbing, genocide, land claims and struggles that has created a night mare for the security landscape of the region. In contemporary times, there is no denying the fact that there is an ethnic question in the North Central of Nigeria where there has been a revival of ethnic nationalism by some irredentist groups reinforced by revisionist historians. The ethnic nationalism which on one hand is a cultural revival but on the other promotes a hate agenda, is dangerous and antithetical to the inter group relations and unity of the North Central of Nigeria.
Ethnic hate, the idea that some ethnic nationalities do not belong or have indigenous roots in a state, has been responsible for some of the modern genocide and massacre in the history of modern Nigeria.
For political and security reasons, there is scanty research in this regard, the study of modern genocide backed by state action. Or where such research exist, it is often play down and watered as inter group conflicts and violent hostilities that should be treated with kids gloves and palliatives. This liberal and pessimistic approach to conflict management has been a responsible factor in the decimal reoccurrence of violent ethnic conflicts of the North Central States. The Liberal approach to conflict management, looks at the symptoms instead of the treatment of the disease.
Ethnocentrism is both an African and Nigerian reality that over time and space has been fueled and exploited by the ruling political class and elites. It is one of critical challenge of nation building in Africa that appears to be a curse of a continent and people.
All nations of the world have their share of the nightmare of ethnic and racial bigotry at one point or the other in their national history and transformation.
In the United States of America, it was dubbed the race question in the post emancipation era, the politics of the color line as William Dubios described the racial tension and phenomenon of his prevailing age and society. The race question sparked many reactions including the establishment of societies and organizations for the protection of the African American as well as the defence of the fundamental civil rights of the “American Negro”.
One of such initiative adopted by the State in America which was aimed at the improvement of the welfare and wellbeing of the African American as as his integration into main stream society was the establishment of the Bureau For Freed Men on race relations. The Bureau as a Federal institution was designed for the reconciliation of the inequality and segregation of the African American inorder for him to access equitable development and national resources, but, more importantly, political representation at both state and national level.
Subsequently, the Bureau came up with a number of proactive programmes and policies including the Affirmative Action as well as Federal Character Quota Systems that ensured the equitable and just integration of African Americans in main stream society and politics.
In recent years, Nigeria has established some regional frameworks that can translate into the creation of a Bureau for Ethnic Relations. One of such regional framework is the establishment of the North Central Development Commission by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The Development Commission if strategically placed and positioned, can create a Bureau For Ethnic Relations that will help promote and reconcile inter-ethnic relations and development within the North Central of Nigeria.
I am limited as to the mandate of the commission interms development and the transformation of the North Central of Nigeria.
If the commission suffers from a deficit to manage ethnic relations along the lines of affirmative action and federal character principle, then, the federal government should as a matter of social priority establish an Bureau For Ethnic Relations of the six geopolitical units of Nigeria.
Let me end this write up by using the words of William Dubios that the challenge of Nigeria in the twenty first century is that of ethnic relations, it is that of the ethnic content, that of fairer skin races to that of the dark skin races.
Prof. Uji Wilfred is from the Department of History and International Studies, Federal University of Lafia
Education
Varsity Don Advocates Establishment of National Bureau for Ethnic Relations, Inter-Group Unity

By David Torough, Abuja
A university scholar, Prof. Uji Wilfred of the Department of History and International Studies, Federal University of Lafia, has called on the Federal Government to establish a National Bureau for Ethnic Relations to strengthen inter-group unity and address the deep-seated ethnic tensions in Nigeria, particularly in the North Central region.
Prof.
Wilfred, in a paper drawing from years of research, argued that the six states of the North Central—Kwara, Niger, Kogi, Benue, Plateau, and Nasarawa share long-standing historical, cultural, and economic ties that have been eroded by arbitrary state boundaries and ethnic politics.According to him, pre-colonial North Central Nigeria was home to a rich mix of ethnic groups—including Nupe, Gwari, Gbagi, Eggon, Igala, Idoma, Jukun, Alago, Tiv, Birom, Tarok, Angas, among others, who coexisted through indigenous peace mechanisms.
These communities, he noted, were amalgamated by British colonial authorities under the Northern Region, first headquartered in Lokoja before being moved to Kaduna.
He stressed that state creation, which was intended to promote minority inclusion, has in some cases fueled exclusionary politics and ethnic tensions. “It is historically misleading,” Wilfred stated, “to regard certain ethnic nationalities as mere tenant settlers in states where they have deep indigenous roots.”
The don warned that such narratives have been exploited by political elites for land grabbing, ethnic cleansing, and violent conflicts, undermining security in the sub-region.
He likened Nigeria’s ethnic question to America’s historic “race question” and urged the adoption of structures similar to the Freedmen’s Bureau, which addressed racial inequality in post-emancipation America through affirmative action and equitable representation.
Wilfred acknowledged the recent creation of the North Central Development Commission by President Bola Tinubu as a step in the right direction, but said its mandate may not be sufficient to address ethnic relations.
He urged the federal government to either expand the commission’s role or create a dedicated Bureau for Ethnic Relations in all six geo-political zones to foster reconciliation, equality, and sustainable development.
Quoting African-American scholar W.E.B. Du Bois, Prof. Wilfred concluded that the challenge of Nigeria in the 21st century is fundamentally one of ethnic relations, which must be addressed with deliberate policies for unity and integration.
OPINION
The Pre-2027 Party gold Rush
By Dakuku Peterside
The 2027 general elections are fast approaching, and Nigeria’s political landscape is undergoing a rapid transformation. New acronyms, and freshly minted party logos are emerging, promising a new era of renewal and liberation.To the casual observer, this may seem like democracy in full bloom — citizens exercising their right to association, political diversity flourishing, and the marketplace of ideas expanding.
However, beneath this surface, a more urgent reality is unfolding. The current rush to establish new parties is less about ideological conviction or grassroots movements and more about strategic positioning, bargaining leverage, and transactional gain.It is the paradox of Nigerian politics: proliferation as a sign of vitality, and as a symptom of democratic fragility. With 2027 on the horizon, the political air is electric, not with fresh ideas, but with a gold rush to create new political parties.Supporters call it the flowering of democracy. But scratch the surface and you will see something else: opportunism dressed as pluralism. This is not just politics; it is political merchandising. Parties are being set up like small businesses, complete with negotiation value, resale potential, and short-term profit models. Today, Nigeria has 19 registered political parties, one of the highest numbers in the world behind India (2,500), Brazil (35), and Indonesia (18).History serves as a cautionary tale in this context. Whenever Nigeria has embraced multi-party politics, the electoral battlefield has eventually narrowed to a contest between two main poles. In the early 1990s, General Ibrahim Babangida’s political transition programme deliberately engineered a two-party structure by decreeing the creation of the National Republican Convention (NRC) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP).His justification was rooted in the observation — controversial but not entirely unfounded — that Nigeria’s political psychology tends to gravitate toward two dominant camps, thereby simplifying voter choice and fostering more stable governance. Pro-democracy activists condemned the move as state-engineered politics, but over time, the pattern became embedded.When Nigeria returned to civilian rule in 1999, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) emerged as the dominant force, facing off against the All People’s Party (APP) and Alliance for Democracy (AD) coalition. The 2003 and 2007 elections pitted the PDP against the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP); in 2011, the PDP contended with both the ANPP and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC).By 2015, the formation of the All Progressives Congress (APC) — a coalition of the CPC, ANPP, Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) — restored the two-bloc dynamic. This ‘two-bloc dynamic’ refers to the situation where most of the political power is concentrated within two main parties, leading to a less diverse and competitive political landscape. Even when dozens of smaller parties appeared on the ballot, the real contest was still a battle of two heavyweights.And yet, here we are again, with Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) registering nineteen parties but facing an avalanche of new applications — 110 by late June, swelling to at least 122 by early July. This surge is striking, especially considering that after the 2019 general elections, INEC deregistered seventy-four parties for failing to meet constitutional performance requirements — a decision upheld by the Supreme Court in 2021.That landmark ruling underscored that party registration is not a perpetual license; it is a privilege conditioned on meeting electoral benchmarks, such as a minimum vote share and representation across the federation. The surge in party formation could potentially lead to a more complex and fragmented electoral process, making it harder for voters to make informed decisions and for smaller parties to gain traction.So, what explains the surge in the formation of new parties now? The reasons are not mysterious. Money is the bluntest answer, but it is woven with other motives. For some, creating a party is a strategic move to position themselves for negotiations with larger parties — trading endorsements, securing “alliances,” and even extracting concessions like campaign funding or political appointments.Others set up “friendly” parties designed to dilute opposition votes in targeted constituencies, often indirectly benefiting the ruling party. Some political entrepreneurs build parties as personal vehicles for regional ambitions or as escape routes from established parties, where rival factions have captured the leadership.Some are escape pods for politicians frozen out of the ruling APC’s machinery. There is also a genuine democratic impulse among certain groups to create platforms for neglected ideas or underrepresented constituencies. But the transactional motive often eclipses these idealistic efforts, leaving most new parties as temporary instruments, rather than enduring institutions.The democratic consequences of this kind of proliferation are profound. On one hand, political pluralism is a constitutional right and an essential feature of democracy. On the other hand, too many weak, poorly organised parties can fragment the opposition, confuse voters, and degrade the quality of political competition.Many of these micro-parties lack ward-level presence, a consistent membership drive, and ideological coherence. Their manifestos are often generic, interchangeable documents crafted to meet registration requirements, rather than to present a distinct policy vision. On election-day, their presence on the ballot can be more of a distraction than a contribution, and after the polls close, many vanish from public life until the next cycle of political registration. This is not democracy — it is ballot clutter.This is not uniquely Nigerian. In India, a few thousands registered parties exist, yet only a fraction of them is active or competitive at the state or national level. Brazil, notorious for its highly fragmented legislature, has struggled with unstable coalitions and governance deadlock; even now, it is reducing the number of effective parties.Indonesia allows many parties to register but imposes a parliamentary threshold — currently four per cent of the national vote — to limit legislative fragmentation. These examples, along with others from around the world, suggest that plurality can work, but only when paired with guardrails: stringent conditions for registration, clear criteria for participation, performance-based retention, and an electoral culture that rewards sustained engagement over fleeting visibility.Nigeria already has a version of this in place, courtesy of INEC’s power to deregister. We deregistered seventy-four parties in 2020 for failing to meet performance standards, and five years later, we are sprinting back to the same cliff.Yet, loopholes remain especially, and the process is reactive rather than proactive. Registration conditionalities are lax. This is where both INEC and the ruling APC must shoulder greater responsibility. The need for electoral reform is urgent, and it is time for all stakeholders to act.For INEC, the task is to strengthen its oversight by tightening membership verification, enhancing financial transparency, and expanding its geographic spread requirements, as well as introducing periodic revalidation between election cycles.For the ruling party, the challenge lies in upholding political ethics: resisting the temptation to exploit party proliferation to splinter the opposition for short-term gain. A strong ruling party in a democracy wins competitive elections, not one that manipulates the field to run unopposed. Strong democracy requires a credible opposition, not a scattering of paper platforms that cannot even win a ward councillor seat.Here is the truth: this system needs reform. Reform doesn’t mean closing the democratic space, but making it meaningful and orderly. Democracy must balance full freedom of association with the need for order. While freedom encourages many parties, order requires limiting their number to a manageable level.For example, Nigeria could require parties to have active structures in two-thirds of states, a verifiable membership, and annual audited financials. Parties failing to win National Assembly seats in two consecutive elections could lose registration.The message to new parties is clear: prove you’re more than just a logo and acronym. Build lasting movements — organise locally, offer real policies alternatives, and stay engaged between elections.Democracy is a contest of ideas, discipline, and trust. If the 2027 rush is allowed to run unchecked, we will end up with the worst of both worlds — a crowded ballot and an empty choice. Mergers should be incentivised through streamlined legal processes and possibly electoral benefits, such as ballot priority or increased public funding. At the same time, independent candidates should be allowed more room to compete, ensuring that reform does not entrench an exclusive two-party cartel.Ultimately, the deeper issue here is the erosion of public trust. Nigerians have no inherent hostility to new political formations; what they distrust are political outfits that emerge in the months leading up to an election, strike opaque deals, and disappear without a trace. Politicians must resist the temptation to treat politics as a seasonal business opportunity and instead invest in it as a long-term public service.As 2027 approaches, Nigeria stands at a familiar but critical juncture. The country can indulge the frenzy — rolling out yet another logo, staging yet another press conference, promising yet another “structure” that exists mainly on paper. Or it can seize this moment to rethink how political competition is structured: open but disciplined, plural but purposeful, competitive but coherent.Fewer parties will not automatically make Nigeria’s democracy healthier. But better parties — rooted in communities, committed to clear policies, and resilient beyond election season — just might. And that is a choice within reach, if those who hold the levers of power are willing to leave the system stronger than they found it.Dakuku Peterside, a public sector turnaround expert, public policy analyst and leadership coach, is the author of the forthcoming book, “Leading in a Storm”, a book on crisis leadership.