Professor Udenta O. Udenta, a pro-democracy activist and founding National Secretary of the Alliance for Democracy (AD), has proposed the establishment of a Sovereign Commission for Democratic Sustainability and National Stability to address Nigeria’s political tensions and prevent elections from triggering national crises.
Udenta argued that the challenge ahead of the 2027 general election goes beyond who emerges president, stressing that the country must prioritise national unity and democratic stability over individual political ambitions. For example, he declared that while he is a fervent Peter Obi supporter and will vote for him, there are other players who will drive this project with him that are supporters of President Tinubu, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Gov Seyi Makinde and the other presidential candidates.
He further averted that “elections cannot, by themselves, build trust or guarantee stability,” adding that the critical question was “what becomes of the nation the day after”. He stressed that “Nigeria’s survival must matter more than the fortunes of any politician,” because “Nigeria is not” temporary.
The proposed commission would bring together the sitting President if he is seeking re-election, the incoming president if he is newly elected, , all certified presidential candidates, national leaders and chairmen of political parties, leaders of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC), the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) and civil society representatives.
Udenta said the initiative was designed to be a practical platform for dialogue rather than “another committee of former officeholders or political elders issuing communiqués that gather dust”.
He proposed that all political parties and their presidential candidates make seven pre-election commitments, including participating in the commission regardless of electoral outcome. He said membership would be based on candidacy, declaring that it “only derives from one’s status as a Presidential Candidate. Period”.
Other proposals include a commitment by the winner to convene the commission after the election, establish a time-bound, 18-month Government of National Unity based on competence, and pursue reforms to reduce the winner-takes-all nature of presidential politics.
The proposed reforms also include legislation for audited public funding of eligible political parties, proportional executive representation, a national dialogue on an Afrocentric democratic model and the restoration of cabinet-level Special Advisers for Inter-Party Matters and Civil Society Relations.
On political party financing, Udenta cited Germany, Sweden, South Africa, Kenya, Malawi and Tanzania as countries with public subsidy arrangements for political parties. He argued that transparent funding tied to verified electoral thresholds would “reduce parties’ dependence on wealthy patrons, encourage stronger organisation and help credible opposition parties survive between elections”.
He maintained that such funding must be governed by disclosure requirements, independent audits and penalties for abuse, rather than left to the discretion of the ruling party.
Udenta also outlined a timeline for the proposed commission, calling for all presidential candidates to “jointly urge calm and direct disputes through lawful channels” within 72 hours of the declaration of election results. He proposed that the commission hold its first formal meeting within 30 days and publish substantive recommendations within 100 days, requiring a public response from the President.
He warned against confusing national stability with the suppression of dissent, declaring: “A stable country is not one in which citizens are afraid to speak”.
According to him, genuine democratic stability requires citizens to disagree peacefully, journalists to investigate without intimidation, courts to operate without political interference and peaceful protests not to be criminalised as treason.
He also insisted that opposition parties must retain their freedom to criticise the government, noting that “a voter who supported the losing candidate does not become less Nigerian when the results are announced”.
Beyond electoral reforms, Udenta called for stronger federating units and subnational institutions to reduce the concentration of power and resources at the centre. He argued that excessive centralisation makes control of the Federal Government an all-or-nothing political contest.
He further advocated a political culture organised around ideas and policy alternatives rather than ethnic affiliations and entrenched political interests, envisioning a “national political geography not of ethnicities but of ideological persuasions”.
The professor said he had begun consultations with citizens across civil society, academia and the political spectrum to advance the proposal, while urging voters to hold political aspirants accountable before they assume office.
“My generation has seen military rule, democratic transitions and the rise and decline of political parties,” he said. “We have learned that no individual is indispensable. Nigeria is. We must leave our children a country in which winning an election brings responsibility, losing one does not mean political extinction, and every citizen remains part of the Republic”.
In his concluding challenge to political leaders, Udenta asked: “Will you help build a democracy that belongs to the whole country, or preserve a system in which every election threatens to divide it?”
He stressed that although political rivalry and competition were necessary in a democracy, they must not undermine national institutions, adding that “only our collective commitment to the national interest can determine whether Nigeria endures and thrives”.
