There is a particular irony unfolding across Nigeria’s political landscape. For months, serving senators and members of the House of Representatives participated in debates on electoral reform. They agreed at Committee level to pass a very progressive Electoral Bill. And they allowed their leadership to submit the Committee-agreed Electoral Bill to the Executive for vetting and approval. They defended provisions designed to democratise candidate selection, reduce elite control of party nominations, strengthen transparency, and give ordinary party members greater influence over who emerges as candidates.
Many voted enthusiastically for the Electoral Act 2026, after the executive had vetted it.
Today, some of those same lawmakers are discovering what electoral reform looks like when it is applied to them.
Across the country, the recent primaries for Senate and House of Representatives tickets have produced an unusual spectacle: legislators publicly challenging processes that were shaped by legislation they themselves enacted. Complaints have emerged over direct primaries, state-level interference, manipulation of party structures, imposition of candidates, and the overwhelming influence of governors in determining outcomes.
The irony is difficult to ignore. The lawmakers who once argued for greater transparency within political parties and more democratic nomination processes… are now confronting the practical consequences of those reforms.
The Reformers Meet Reality
Electoral reform is often discussed in abstract terms, like “transparency”, “participation”, “internal party democracy” and “level playing field”.
These principles sound attractive when directed at political opponents or future legislatures. They become considerably more complicated when they threaten one’s own political survival.
The Electoral Act altered the political environment in which National Assembly elections are contested. Incumbency, while still important, no longer guarantees renomination. Long-standing relationships with party delegates no longer provide the same level of protection. Political calculations that once operated within relatively predictable structures have become far less certain.
Many lawmakers who entered the primary season expecting automatic return tickets discovered that the new rules created vulnerabilities that did not previously exist.
The result has been a wave of dissatisfaction from individuals who once championed the reforms now shaping their political fortunes.
The Governor Factor
Yet the primaries have also exposed an important limitation of the reform project.
The Electoral Act sought to reduce elite capture of candidate selection processes. What it did not fully anticipate was the capacity of governors and state-level political structures to adapt.
Rather than eliminating political influence, the reforms have in many cases relocated it.
Across several states, governors and dominant state political actors demonstrated their continuing ability to shape primary outcomes through control of party structures, mobilisation networks, and local political machinery. Complaints arising from APC primaries have frequently centred on allegations that state-level actors exercised overwhelming influence over candidate emergence.
The lesson is an important one.
Laws can change procedures. They do not automatically change power.
The Survival of the Leadership Class
One of the most striking features of the primaries is that many members of the National Assembly’s top leadership successfully secured renomination despite widespread turbulence affecting other incumbents.
This demonstrates a broader truth about legislative politics.
Formal rules matter but political networks matter even more.
Principal officers enjoy advantages that extend beyond electoral frameworks. Years of relationship-building within party structures, connections with state and national political actors, and enhanced political visibility often provide a level of resilience that newer legislators struggle to match.
While many incumbents faced uncertainty, much of the leadership class appears to have navigated the new terrain successfully.
A Legislature Learning an Old Lesson
The deeper significance of the primaries extends beyond individual victories and defeats.
The events of recent weeks have exposed a recurring feature of democratic reform: legislators often support reforms in principle without fully anticipating how those reforms may affect them personally.
It is one thing to legislate for accountability.
It is another to become accountable to the legislation you passed.
The current moment therefore represents more than a contest over party tickets. It is a test of whether Nigeria’s political class is prepared to accept the consequences of reforms when those consequences become politically inconvenient.
The Real Question for the 11th National Assembly
As Nigeria moves closer to the 2027 General Election, the most important question may not be whether the Electoral Act changed the composition of the National Assembly.
The more important question is whether the next Assembly will have the courage to address the weaknesses revealed by the primaries.
Will lawmakers strengthen internal party democracy?
Will they confront the growing dominance of governors over candidate selection?
Will they create more meaningful pathways for women, young people, and new political entrants?
Or will they seek to restore the protections that many incumbents once enjoyed?
The answers will determine whether the Electoral Act becomes a genuine instrument of democratic deepening or merely another chapter in Nigeria’s long history of political adaptation.
For now, the primaries have produced a remarkable political irony.
The legislators who wrote the rules are learning what it means to live under them.