The story of Nigerian politics cannot be understood without examining the shadowy architecture of influence that shapes leadership across the federation. Behind every governor, minister, or rising political figure, there is often a powerful individual whose authority does not come from the ballot but from the ability to determine who appears on it. These individuals, commonly known as kingmakers, operate as the unseen engineers of political succession. They negotiate power sharing arrangements, secure strategic appointments, and shape policy directions long before the public ever casts a vote. To understand Nigerian politics is to understand the machinery of these succession networks.
Nowhere is this machinery more visible today than in Rivers State, where a fierce political confrontation has transformed the state into the most dramatic battleground for succession politics in contemporary Nigeria. What appears on the surface as a personal disagreement between two powerful actors is, in reality, a structural crisis that exposes the hidden blueprint used by kingmakers across the country. It is a blueprint built on control, loyalty, and the illusion that political power can be transferred without consequence.
As a daughter of Rivers State, watching this administrative warfare tear through the fabric of my home evokes deep anger, embarrassment, and disappointment. Rivers State, once celebrated as the Treasure Base of the Nation, has been reduced to an executive boxing ring. Governance has been frozen, institutions have been weaponized, and the future of millions has been held hostage by a struggle over who controls the political keys to the state. This crisis is not an isolated event. It is a warning to the entire federation about the dangers of a political culture built on godfatherism and succession manipulation.
To analyse this crisis responsibly, we must examine the blueprint that kingmakers use across Nigeria’s major political parties. Whether in the All Progressive Congress or the People’s Democratic Party, the same pattern repeats itself. The foundational flaw of this blueprint is a persistent delusion; The belief that an outgoing leader can hand over the immense executive power of a state to a successor while retaining control of the treasury, appointments, and political direction. This model treats a state government as a private enterprise where the outgoing chief executive appoints a preferred manager to run operations while they continue to dictate strategy from behind the curtain.
For decades, this has been the standard operating procedure in Nigerian politics. Kingmakers deliberately avoid strong, independent minded technocrats and instead select quiet, seemingly compliant individuals, often from the civil service or loyalist blocs. The assumption is that gratitude will translate into permanent submission. In 2023, the former governor handpicked a quiet civil servant and placed him on the ballot, believing he had found a successor who would govern with deference. But the blueprint always collapses because it ignores the transformative nature of executive power.
The moment a successor takes the constitutional oath of office, they are clothed with the full authority of the state. They gain direct access to public funds, command the loyalty of the civil service, and enjoy the protective shield of executive immunity. These powers fundamentally alter the dynamics of loyalty. The successor quickly discovers that governing according to the dictates of an external benefactor is operationally impossible. The kingmaker, however, expects absolute obedience. This clash of expectations produces immediate friction.
In Rivers State, when the remote control failed to function, the kingmaker’s camp responded with an impeachment attempt through a loyal legislative majority. The governor’s camp retaliated with the controversial demolition of the House of Assembly complex, citing structural defects. The state soon fractured into parallel legislative houses issuing conflicting directives from different locations. What began as a political disagreement escalated into a structural war.
This conflict reached a new height during the House of Assembly screening exercises for the 2026 primaries. In an unprecedented move, the screening committee disqualified sixty-five legislative aspirants. Almost all of them were loyalists of the sitting governor, including high profile figures such as the factional Speaker Victor Oko Jumbo and the outspoken Chijioke Ihunwo. The committee relied on strict technical interpretations of party rules, citing incomplete paperwork, missing party cards, and unpaid dues. Meanwhile, thirty-three candidates loyal to the external benefactor were cleared without difficulty. This was not an administrative coincidence. It was a calculated deployment of party machinery to isolate the governor and weaken his political base. By blocking his loyalists from securing tickets, the kingmaker’s camp positioned itself to control the future composition of the parliament. This ensures that the threat of executive containment remains active long after the current crisis subsides.
The consequences of this supremacy battle have crippled governance in Rivers State. The most alarming manifestation is the ongoing budget impasse. The state is currently executing capital projects and paying salaries without a formally appropriated and gazetted budget passed by a unified, legally recognized parliament. The opposing legislative majority views this as a constitutional violation and keeps the impeachment mechanism on standby. This paralysis has created a dangerous accountability vacuum.
While billions of naira are spent on legal battles, Senior Advocates of Nigeria, and factional mobilization, real development has stalled. Corporate confidence has collapsed. Small businesses are suffocating under double taxation imposed by competing revenue factions. Youth unemployment is rising, and communities are left without basic infrastructure while political actors acquire properties in Abuja and overseas. The people of Rivers State have become collateral damage in a war they did not start. This crisis is not unique to Rivers State. It is part of a broader epidemic of loyalty and executive control that spans the federation.
In Kano State, we see a similar pattern where traditional institutions and ancient emirate laws are weaponized to settle political scores. Across the South West and North Central, handpicked successors frequently turn against their benefactors once they assume office. The nature of executive survival demands independence, and no amount of political engineering can suppress that reality. Rivers State is simply the most explosive example because it involves immense oil wealth and the strategic stability of the Niger Delta waterways.
The stakes are higher, the networks deeper, and the consequences more severe. Temporary peace agreements brokered by external actors cannot resolve this crisis because they address symptoms rather than causes. The root of the problem is the desperate struggle for structural control ahead of the next election cycle. To break this cycle, Nigeria must pursue radical institutional reforms that decouple the state executive from the transactional networks of godfatherism.
First, Nigeria must enforce mandatory direct primaries for all political parties. These primaries should be tied to national identity databases to ensure transparency and prevent manipulation. This reform would shift the power of candidate selection from a small circle of delegates to everyday party members at the ward level. It would weaken the influence of kingmakers and strengthen internal democracy.
Again, the constitution must be amended to guarantee automatic, direct fiscal allocations to state judiciaries and assemblies. These arms of government must operate with complete financial independence. When legislatures and courts rely on the executive for funding, they become vulnerable to manipulation and weaponization. Financial autonomy would restore balance and reduce the likelihood of institutional capture.
Finally, Nigeria must enact laws that hold national party executives criminally liable for using selective screening processes to undermine internal democracy. When party machinery becomes a tool for political punishment, the entire democratic process is compromised.
To the political kingmaker, the message is simple: respect the boundary of time. Once you leave office, you cannot continue to steer the vehicle of governance. The state is not a private enterprise, and the successor is not a caretaker of your legacy. Allow the new administration to breathe.
To the sitting governor, the message is equally clear: governance cannot be conducted through crisis management. Present a transparent budget to a unified house. Focus on the infrastructural decay in rural communities. Demonstrate that your fight for independence is rooted in the welfare of the people, not personal survival.
To the fanatical followers who carry banners, chant war songs, and pledge blind loyalty to either camp, it is time to wake up from this dangerous slumber. The political actors you defend with such passion are not fighting for your future. They are fighting for access to the national cake, for control of contracts, for influence over appointments, and for the preservation of their personal empires. While you march under the sun and rain, your children attend underfunded schools, your communities endure broken roads, and your families struggle under the weight of rising living costs. Do not become a foot soldier in a war that will only enrich your oppressors.
As a disappointed daughter of Rivers State, I call on every true citizen of our land to reject this shameful elite circus. We must collectively demand an immediate, transparent public presentation of the state budget. River’s people deserve to know how their wealth is being allocated, who is benefiting from public contracts, and why development has stalled while political actors engage in endless power struggles. A transparent budget is not a favour; it is a constitutional obligation.
We must also stand firm at our local wards and refuse to participate in manipulated primaries or party processes designed to impose handpicked candidates through selective administrative purges. The mass disqualification of aspirants loyal to the sitting governor is a clear example of how party machinery can be weaponized to predetermine outcomes. If we allow this pattern to continue, Rivers State will remain trapped in a cycle where leaders are not chosen by the people but manufactured by political godfathers.
To both camps, Rivers State is not a personal inheritance or a family estate. It is not a trophy to be passed from one political dynasty to another. Our loyalty belongs to the soil, to the creeks and rivers that define our identity, and to the future of our children. It does not belong to the ego of any political godfather or incumbent.
Rivers State stands at a crossroads. One path leads to continued instability, institutional decay, and elite domination. The other leads to renewal, accountability, and genuine democratic governance. The choice belongs to the people.
Speak out, Stand together and Demand better. The future of Rivers State depends on it.
READ ALSO:
- The Kingmaker’s Blueprint: Succession Networks And The Rivers State Experiment | The Surge By Boma Lilian Braide(Esq.)
- 2027 Elections: All Progressives Congress Releases List of 47 Senatorial Aspirants Not Cleared for Primaries
- Saudi Arabia Announces Dates for Arafat Day and Eid-el-Adha 2026
- Court Grants El-Rufai ₦100 Million Bail
- BATOGD Followers Pull Out of APC Ogun East Senatorial Primary, Cites Intimidation, Violence
