As the ruling party mobilises for 2027 in Lafia, the real test of its leadership is not how many supporters it can assemble, but whether Nigerians can live, farm, travel and raise their children without fear.
On October 10, 2026, APC leaders and supporters converged on Lafia, Nasarawa State, for a North-Central mega rally in support of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Vice-President Kashim Shettima’s re-election bid.
The political message was unmistakable: the campaign for 2027 has begun in earnest.
The APC is coordinating grassroots structures, courting women voters and projecting an ambitious target of 40 million women’s votes. Dr Betta Edu, the former Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation, has emerged as a prominent figure in the party’s women-mobilisation campaign under the leadership of First Lady Oluremi Tinubu.
But the rally raises a question that cannot be answered with campaign slogans: what exactly is the ruling party asking North-Central Nigerians to reward with another mandate?
For people living with insecurity, political mobilisation is not the same thing as governance. A large crowd in Lafia cannot erase the fear of travelling on vulnerable roads, the trauma of losing relatives to violence, the economic damage caused by displacement or the uncertainty facing families unable to return safely to their communities.
The APC can organise a rally. Can it demonstrate that its security policies are delivering results on the ground?
A region that needs protection, not just political mobilisation
North-Central Nigeria is not simply an electoral territory to be divided into wards, polling units and vote targets. It is home to farmers, traders, civil servants, students and families whose livelihoods depend on peace and functioning public institutions.
Yet insecurity has continued to exact a terrible human cost.
In August 2026, Reuters reported that at least 25 people were killed in an attack on a village in Plateau State, according to local officials and residents. The report highlighted the risk of further retaliatory violence in a region already affected by recurring deadly attacks. <Cite refs={["turn963151news5"]}/>
That same month, Reuters reported a mass kidnapping in Niger State. An armed group claimed to have abducted hundreds of people, including women, children and elderly people. The exact number was not independently verified, but the reported scale of the incident exposed the frightening reach of armed groups operating across parts of north-western and north-central Nigeria. <Cite refs={["turn963151news4","turn963151news6"]}/>
These are not abstract security statistics. They describe the kind of danger that can transform ordinary life into a struggle for survival.
The displacement figures are equally sobering. The International Organization for Migration’s October 2025 assessment recorded 1,378,124 internally displaced people across the North-Central and North-West states covered by its assessment. The report identified armed banditry and kidnapping, farmer-herder violence, communal clashes and other crises among the causes of displacement. <Cite refs={["turn486452search5"]}/>
The figure covers multiple states across two geopolitical zones; it should not be misrepresented as a North-Central-only total. But it makes one point impossible to ignore: insecurity has created a massive humanitarian challenge that demands sustained public attention and effective government action.
For the women the APC says it wants to mobilise, the stakes are especially immediate. When insecurity disrupts farming, women lose income and food supplies. When families flee their homes, mothers must care for children under difficult conditions. When schools and local businesses become inaccessible, the consequences extend far beyond the immediate victims of violence.
A government that wants women’s votes should be prepared to explain what it is doing to make their lives safer.
The 40-million-vote question
The APC’s target of 40 million women’s votes is a political ambition, not evidence that 40 million women support the party or that the target will be achieved.
The distinction matters.
A mobilisation target can be measured through campaign structures, attendance, outreach and voter engagement. Government performance must be measured differently: through outcomes.
How many communities have become safer? How many abducted people have been rescued? How effectively are intelligence and security operations preventing attacks? How many displaced families have returned voluntarily to conditions that allow them to live safely and earn a living? What happens to officials who fail in their responsibilities?
These are the questions a serious electoral campaign should welcome.
The APC’s North-Central mobilisation programme has also been reported to include medical outreaches, advocacy tours and town-hall meetings. Those initiatives could offer practical benefits if they are properly delivered. But they should be assessed by their reach, quality, transparency and lasting impact—not merely announced as part of a political programme. <Cite refs={["turn486452search1"]}/>
Medical outreach can help people access healthcare. It cannot replace security. A town hall can give citizens a platform to speak. It cannot substitute for a government that acts on what they say.
If the party can coordinate political structures across states and communities, Nigerians are entitled to ask whether comparable urgency is being applied to coordinating security responses across state boundaries.
Indeed, in September 2026, Premium Times reported calls by Benue and Plateau governors for a stronger regional approach to insecurity, including better intelligence gathering, cooperation between states and coordinated security operations. <Cite refs={["turn963151search3"]}/>
That is the kind of practical coordination that deserves attention—not only the coordination of campaign messages.
Betta Edu and the question of public accountability
The political prominence of Betta Edu adds another difficult dimension to the story.
In January 2024, President Tinubu suspended Edu as Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation after controversy over a ₦585.2 million transaction involving funds intended for vulnerable groups. The President directed the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to investigate financial transactions involving the ministry and related agencies. Edu denied wrongdoing.
The significance of that episode was not merely its financial value. It concerned a ministry whose mandate included humanitarian assistance and poverty alleviation—areas affecting Nigerians already struggling with deprivation.
When public funds intended for vulnerable people become the subject of a major financial controversy, public confidence is inevitably damaged. The public deserves transparent answers about how such money was handled, what investigators established and whether appropriate institutional action followed.
But the facts must be handled responsibly. Suspension is not a criminal conviction, and the reported investigation should not be presented as proof that Edu stole money. In April 2024, her lawyer publicly challenged reporting that, in his view, wrongly implied that she had been found culpable.
The legitimate political question is therefore not whether a person can be declared guilty by social-media commentary. It is whether the ruling party can demonstrate that its approach to accountability is consistent, transparent and credible.
Why should voters trust a party’s promises about protecting the vulnerable if it does not clearly explain how it addresses serious controversies involving public resources intended for them?
If Edu is to play a leading role in mobilising women for the APC, the party should be prepared to answer reasonable questions about the former minister’s record and the status of the investigation. That is not a demand to prejudge her guilt. It is a demand for public accountability.
Political rehabilitation should not depend solely on party loyalty or campaign usefulness. Nor should allegations be treated as convictions. A credible democracy requires both due process and transparency.
Women are citizens, not electoral instruments
There is a deeper contradiction in presenting women primarily as a 40-million-vote mobilisation target while insecurity and poverty continue to threaten many of the same communities.
Women are not simply votes to be collected. They are citizens entitled to security, healthcare, economic opportunity, education and accountable government.
A woman farmer in Benue needs to know whether she can cultivate her land and harvest her crops without being driven away by violence. A trader in Nasarawa needs roads and markets where she can work safely. A mother whose family has been displaced needs more than a campaign speech about prosperity. She needs a realistic path to safety, shelter, livelihood and recovery.
The question is not whether women should participate in party politics. They absolutely should. Nor is there anything inherently wrong with parties organising women’s political networks.
The question is what political leaders offer in return for the trust they seek.
If the campaign's language is “From Reforms to Prosperity,” voters should be able to see how those reforms translate into safer communities, reliable public services and greater economic security. Prosperity is not meaningful to a family that cannot safely return home or earn a living.
What the APC should be explaining before 2027
The ruling party should use its campaign to set out measurable commitments, not merely ambitious vote targets.
First, it should explain its security strategy for the North-Central region, including how federal and state authorities will improve intelligence sharing, prevent attacks, disrupt criminal networks and protect communities.
Second, it should publish clear measures of progress. Nigerians need credible reporting on attacks, rescues, investigations, prosecutions and the conditions facing displaced families. Security announcements should be assessed against independently verifiable outcomes.
Third, the government should demonstrate that humanitarian resources reach their intended beneficiaries. Investigations involving public funds must be handled transparently and fairly, with established findings made public where legally appropriate.
Finally, the APC should make its 2027 promises specific enough for voters to judge. “Renewed Hope” and “prosperity” are political messages. The public deserves commitments with timelines, responsible institutions and measurable results.
None of these demands is unreasonable. They are the basic expectations citizens should have of a party seeking to remain in power.
The real campaign is about performance
The APC is entitled to organise rallies, recruit supporters and seek another mandate. Its political opponents are equally entitled to challenge its record.
But North-Central Nigeria cannot be reduced to a map of electoral calculations. The people living there are not campaign statistics. They are citizens whose lives and livelihoods depend on whether government institutions can perform their most fundamental duties.
The appearance of senior party figures in Lafia demonstrates political activity. It does not, on its own, demonstrate security success, effective poverty alleviation or public accountability.
The same standard should apply to Betta Edu’s new political role: assess the documented record, demand clarity about unresolved questions, and do not confuse an allegation with a proven offence.
As the 2027 election approaches, the APC should be asked a straightforward question: what tangible improvements in security and public welfare can Nigerians point to—and what will the party do differently if it receives another mandate?
A government seeking 40 million women’s votes should be prepared to listen to millions of women asking for safety, dignity and accountability.
The most convincing campaign for re-election would not be the one that announces the biggest vote target. It would be the one that can show, with evidence, that Nigerians are safer and better served than they were before.
Winning votes is a political objective. Protecting lives is a governing responsibility. Nigeria needs the ruling party to demonstrate that it understands the difference.
Comments
Post a Comment