There comes a point in every political contest when ambition must give way to reality, when political theatre must end and when those still clinging to a lost battle must accept the verdict of the process.
For the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Udi/Ezeagu Federal Constituency, that moment appears to have arrived.
Yet, rather remarkably, the political drama surrounding the 2027 House of Representatives ticket refuses to die.
Dr. Festus Uzor emerged from the APC primary as the party’s candidate for Udi/Ezeagu Federal Constituency. He did not merely announce himself as a candidate; he emerged through the party’s nomination process and, according to information available on the matter, was subsequently sponsored by the APC.
But incumbent member of the House of Representatives, Barrister Sunday Umeha, who lost the APC primary, is reportedly still telling supporters that he remains the party’s candidate.
That raises a simple question: How long can this political charade continue?
Umeha’s supporters may choose to believe that political miracles are still possible. They may continue to whisper about impending manoeuvres, mysterious arrangements or some yet-to-be-seen reversal of the primary outcome.
But politics is not a WhatsApp fantasy.
Neither is the electoral process a playground where a candidate who lost a party primary can simply proclaim himself the winner because his supporters refuse to accept the result.
The Law Is Not Ambiguous
The Electoral Act 2026 provides a rather instructive roadmap.
Section 29(1) requires every political party to submit to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), within the prescribed period, the list of candidates it proposes to sponsor, “who shall have emerged from valid primaries conducted by the political party.”
That provision is significant.
It means the legal journey to becoming a party’s candidate does not begin and end with personal popularity, incumbency, political connections or the size of a supporter base.
The candidate must emerge from the party’s valid nomination process.
And that is precisely where the Udi/Ezeagu controversy becomes difficult for Umeha and his supporters to explain away.
Dr. Uzor defeated Umeha in the APC primary, and the APC subsequently recognised and sponsored Uzor, and as such, the burden is no longer on Uzor to prove that he is the candidate every morning.
The burden is on anyone challenging his emergence to establish a lawful basis for overturning it.
There is a difference between not accepting an electoral outcome and legally overturning an electoral outcome.
The former requires political propaganda.
The latter requires evidence, law and, where necessary, a court judgment.
Umeha Has a Legal Route — But Not a Magical One
To be clear, this is not an argument that an aggrieved aspirant has no legal remedy.
The Electoral Act 2026 expressly recognises the right of an aspirant who participated in a party primary to seek judicial redress where the provisions of the Act or the party’s guidelines were allegedly violated.
Section 88(2) provides that an aspirant who complains that the law or the party’s guidelines were not complied with in the selection or nomination of a candidate may apply to the Federal High Court for redress.
That is the lawful route.
So, if Umeha believes the APC primary that produced Uzor was invalid, the question should not be whether he can convince his followers that he is still the candidate.
The question should be whether he can successfully demonstrate before the appropriate court that the primary violated the Electoral Act, the APC’s applicable guidelines or other legally enforceable requirements.
Until such a determination is made, political declarations cannot substitute for the outcome of the party’s nomination process.
And Then Comes Section 33
Perhaps the most devastating provision for the theory that APC can simply wake up one morning and hand the ticket to another aspirant is Section 33 of the Electoral Act 2026.
The law provides that a political party “shall not be allowed to change or substitute its candidate whose name has been submitted under Section 29”, except in the event of the candidate’s death or withdrawal. Where either occurs, the party is required to conduct another primary within 14 days to produce a new candidate.
Read that again.
The law does not contemplate a political party casually replacing its duly submitted candidate because another aspirant is influential, dissatisfied or has refused to accept defeat.
If Uzor is the candidate validly nominated and submitted by the APC, there is no provision in Section 33 for replacing him simply because Umeha wants the ticket back.
Death or voluntary withdrawal are the statutory exceptions expressly identified by the provision.
That is why the narrative being sold to unsuspecting supporters deserves serious scrutiny.
The Ship Has Sailed
A senior APC source who spoke to a Journalist101 correspondent on condition of anonymity described Umeha’s continued claim to the ticket as an exercise in self-deception.
“Umeha is living in fools paradise and should stop wasting his money on political jobbers milking him on the guise of handing him over the APC ticket, that ship has sailed and Dr. Uzor is the candidate of our party.”
That statement may sound brutal.
But underneath its political language lies a question that deserves an answer: what exactly is the legal mechanism through which Umeha expects to become the APC candidate after losing the party’s primary?
Not campaign posters.
Not political meetings.
Not social-media declarations.
Not assurances from political jobbers.
Not claims that somebody somewhere will “sort it out.”
What is the legal instrument?
Where is the court judgment?
Where is the APC resolution reversing its primary?
Where is the fresh primary?
Where is the statutory basis for substituting Uzor with Umeha?
Until those questions are answered, the claim remains precisely what it appears to be: a political aspiration masquerading as an accomplished fact.
Incumbency Is Not a Party Ticket
Perhaps the greatest misunderstanding in this entire saga is the assumption that occupying a seat in the House of Representatives automatically creates an entitlement to the party’s ticket for another election.
It does not.
Umeha was elected to the House in 2023 on the platform of the Labour Party, not the APC. INEC’s 2023 candidate records identify him as the Labour Party candidate for Ezeagu/Udi.
He subsequently defected to the APC in 2025. At the time, Umeha himself explained that he had resigned from the Labour Party and registered with the APC.
His defection gave him membership of the APC.
It did not give him ownership of the APC ticket.
Membership is not nomination.
Incumbency is not nomination.
Political visibility is not nomination.
And personal conviction is certainly not nomination.
The ticket belongs to whoever the party lawfully nominates.
The Dangerous Business of Political Jobbers
This is where Umeha’s political advisers should perhaps do him a greater service.
If the reports about political jobbers surrounding him are accurate, then the greatest danger to his political future may not be Dr. Uzor at all.
It may be the people who keep telling him what he wants to hear.
There is a thriving industry in Nigerian politics built around selling political hope to politicians who have lost elections, lost primaries or lost influence.
The merchandise is always the same:
“Wait.”
“Something will happen.”
“The party will reverse it.”
“INEC will change it.”
“Those people are only making noise.”
“The ticket is still yours.”
“Your enemies cannot stop you.”
Sometimes these assurances are worth little more than the money spent purchasing them.
And the danger is that by the time reality finally arrives, the politician may have spent enormous resources fighting an enemy that existed largely in his imagination.
Uzor’s Victory Is Not a Coronation — It Is a Process
Dr. Uzor, of course, must also understand that winning a primary does not mean he has been crowned untouchable.
The law permits legitimate challenges.
If any aspirant believes the primary was compromised or conducted contrary to the law or applicable party guidelines, that person has the right to seek judicial redress.
That is democracy.
But there is a profound difference between challenging a nomination and inventing an alternative nomination.
One is a legal process.
The other is political theatre.
If Umeha has evidence that the APC primary was invalid, he should present it through the appropriate legal channel.
If he has a court order recognising him as the APC candidate, let him produce it.
If the APC has formally reversed Uzor’s nomination, let the party make that decision public.
If none of these exists, then perhaps the responsible thing to do is to stop creating expectations among supporters that the law does not presently sustain.
How Long Will the Charade Last?
The Udi/Ezeagu electorate deserves better than an endless political soap opera over a ticket that has already been contested within the party.
They deserve to know who is actually running.
They deserve clarity from the APC.
They deserve to know whether Dr. Festus Uzor is the party’s candidate or whether some lawful development has changed that position.
And most importantly, they deserve politicians who understand that democracy includes the courage to accept an unfavourable outcome and pursue legitimate remedies without misleading followers.
The APC primary was not a private family meeting.
It was a political nomination process.
The Electoral Act 2026 says candidates submitted by political parties must emerge from valid primaries, and it places serious restrictions on changing a candidate once submitted to INEC.
So, unless the primary is successfully invalidated through the appropriate legal process, or the candidate lawfully withdraws or dies and the statutory replacement process is triggered, the argument that Umeha can simply reclaim the APC ticket remains difficult to reconcile with the law.
The question, therefore, is no longer whether Umeha can continue telling his supporters that he is the candidate.
Of course, he can say whatever he wishes.
The more important question is:
How long can the charade continue before political reality finally catches up with the dream?
For now, the APC’s candidate is Dr. Festus Uzor and the recently published INEC list supports this position.
And until a competent court or the legally prescribed electoral process says otherwise, everything else may be little more than political wishful thinking.
