By Bilesanmi Abayomi
With less than two months to the July 12 local government elections in Lagos State, the All Progressives Congress (APC) has officially produced 57 chairmanship and approximately 347 councillorship candidates across the state’s 20 Local Government Areas (LGAs) and 37 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs).
The ruling party concluded its primaries over the weekend, finalising its slate of candidates to consolidate control at the grassroots level. However, the build-up to the elections has been marked by a notable absence of visible opposition mobilisation, raising concerns about the state of political competition in Lagos.
The vacuum created by the opposition’s inertia has sparked internal tensions within the APC itself. In councils like Kosofe, party insiders say some aggrieved members have resorted to playing the role of opposition, a development viewed in some quarters as “anti-party activities,” although no formal disciplinary actions have been taken.
Political observers attribute the opposition’s muted posture to longstanding doubts about the independence and credibility of the Lagos State Independent Electoral Commission (LASIEC). Analysts argue that intra-party contests within the APC have effectively become the main battleground, with final victories for APC candidates seen as largely assured.
This perception is reinforced by electoral history in Lagos. In the 25 years since Nigeria’s return to democracy, LASIEC has never declared an opposition party winner in any council election. Legal challenges mounted by opposition parties over the years have consistently failed, with tribunals and appeal courts upholding LASIEC’s announcements — a pattern mirrored in other states with similar political dominance and state-controlled electoral commissions.
Despite this, civil society organisations and democratic advocates continue to urge opposition parties not to cede the grassroots to the ruling party. They emphasise that political participation — even under challenging conditions — is essential for sustaining democracy, ensuring checks and balances, and holding the ruling party accountable.
Stakeholders call on opposition groups to devise resilient strategies to contest, monitor, and defend their votes. They insist that retreating from the democratic process due to perceived odds only deepens one-party dominance and limits the quality of governance at the local level.