Your Office Is Not a Playground, Minister Wike: APC Demands Your Resignation and a Return to Rivers Politics.

By George Omagbemi Sylvester | saharaweeklyng.com

“Why insisting that a former PDP governor serving in an APC government must choose between party loyalty or chaos is vital for democratic integrity and political sanity.”

Nigeria’s political theatre has seldom been short on drama and yet the latest salvo exchanged between the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister, Nyesom Wike, marks something beyond ordinary political tiff. It exposes a deeper crisis of legitimacy, loyalty and constitutional order in the conduct of public office holders who straddle party lines and seek to influence the affairs of opposing party structures.

On January 5, 2026, APC National Secretary Senator Ajibola Basiru publicly demanded that Wike resign his ministerial appointment, warning that it is incompatible for him to remain in the Federal Executive Council of an APC government “and be causing confusion within any organ or structure of the party at any level.” Basiru explicitly argued that Wike “cannot bring the spirit of PDP into the APC,” and insisted that if he wishes to pursue Rivers State politics, he should leave the cabinet and do so unabashedly on his own turf.

This demand is not mere rhetoric but it is rooted in constitutional norms, political ethics and the moral imperative of democratic cohesion. What the APC’s call underscores is this: political actors cannot selectively switch roles, borrow the authority of one party to influence another, and then cry foul when restrained. Nigeria’s fragile democracy cannot endure such ambiguity.

Wike’s Dual Role: A Contradiction in Terms.
Nyesom Wike’s political resume is impressive by any measure: a former two-term governor of Rivers State and a key figure in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), he has enjoyed political survival and influence that few Nigerians have matched. Yet his current position as the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory in an APC-led government presents an inherent contradiction when he uses that platform to wade into intra-party affairs in Rivers.

Basiru’s argument is not about personal animosity. It is about political coherence and the idea that a ministerial appointee of one party should not be a ghost in the corridors of another’s leadership cockpit. As Basiru reminded the public, Wike’s support for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu does not make him an APC member: “Millions of non-APC Nigerians also support Mr. President and his own is no different.”

This is an important distinction. Political support for a sitting president does not equate to party membership or allegiance. It is one thing to vote for a leader’s policy; it is another to interfere in the internal party mechanics of his political opponents while serving at the highest level of government.

This dilemma (a monopolisation of influence across political boundaries) is precisely what scholars warn against when they talk about institutional integrity. According to political scientist Dr. Samuel M. Makinde of the University of Ibadan, “The essence of party democracy is the clear demarcation of organisational structures and the autonomy of party actors. When actors blur these boundaries, they undermine internal discipline and weaken democratic competition.”

Wike’s interference in Rivers politics (particularly in the leadership tussle involving Governor Siminalayi Fubara and other party operatives) is exactly this kind of boundary-blurring. Whether one views his actions as strategic rescue or partisan sabotage, the optics are clear: a minister in an APC administration acting as though he remains the de facto leader of the Rivers PDP.

Why APC Is Right to Insist on Resignation.
Political parties are (by design) autonomous organisations. They are built on shared ideology, membership loyalty, and internal protocols. A cabinet minister, by contrast, holds executive power derived from the president and the constitution. These roles are not only different; they are structurally incompatible when fused in service of competing political ends.

Basiru’s demand for Wike’s resignation is bolstered by a fundamental principle of good governance: accountability and clarity of roles. Ministerial appointments are offices of public trust, not ethnic or party turfs to be wielded for partisan advantage. Forcing a minister to choose between serving the nation through the cabinet and pursuing state politics reduces the risk of conflicts of loyalty that derange governance.

Furthermore, Wike’s recent warning to APC leaders to “stay out of Rivers politics” (framing the state as a “no-go area”) only fuels the perception that he seeks to shield his political network from legitimate scrutiny and competition.

This kind of rhetoric does little for national unity or institutional integrity. It worsens factionalism and promotes political tribalism, conditions that weaken party structures, distort electoral democracy and stall policy progress.

In the words of Nigerian legal scholar Professor Ayo Olukotun, “Public office holders are custodians of the people’s trust, not personal fiefdoms. When they wear multiple political hats simultaneously, the risk of bias, divided loyalty, and policy incoherence rises sharply.”

PDP Spirit vs APC Structure: Beyond Semantics.
Basiru’s phrase about not allowing the “spirit of PDP” into the APC is more than political hyperbole. It hits at the heart of party identity.

A political party is not a marketplace where ideologies and loyalties are exchanged without consequence. Parties invest in their members; they build institutions; they define campaigns and governance frameworks. The APC’s rebuke stems from a refusal to accept political cross-contamination and the idea that a non-member can dictate or influence party operation under the cover of national office.

Consider this: if cabinet members can freely intervene in the business of opposing party structures, where does that leave party sovereignty? What prevents a future minister from shaping the internal affairs of another party? This is not speculative but it is a real threat to democratic fairness.

Comparative political theory warns against such encroachments. According to Professor Larry Diamond, an authority on democratic governance, “Stable democratic systems require institutional respect and boundaries. When public office holders engage in partisan manipulations beyond their mandate, it erodes confidence in both the state and party systems.”

Checks, Balances and Democratic Sanity.
Wike’s critics (including Basiru) argue that his presence in the cabinet undermines the APC’s efforts to consolidate party operations in the South-South and, by extension, Nigeria’s broader political stability. In practical terms, this shapes voter confidence, electoral strategy, and governance outcomes.

Nigeria, after all, has experienced the worst deficit of trust in institutions in decades. The ruling party cannot afford to allow perceptions of internal sabotage, or characterise legitimate partisan admonition as “interference.” Nor can a national government look on while a minister uses his office to influence sub-national party struggles.

As constitutional law expert Professor Babatunde Fagbayi succinctly puts it, “A minister wears the cloak of the nation, not of factional politics. When that cloak is used to mask partisan advantage, it betrays the public trust.”

The Road Ahead: A Moment of Reckoning for Wike.
The APC’s demand is not a personal vendetta. It is a clarion call for clarity, accountability and democratic fidelity. Nyesom Wike, as a seasoned political veteran, must recognise that his influence does not extend beyond the constitutional and ethical boundaries of the office he occupies.

If Wike genuinely seeks to contribute to Rivers politics (whether to protect his legacy, shape the 2027 contest, or unify factions) the honourable path is clear: resign his ministerial post and engage freely as a politician. Anything less is a recipe for continued conflict, fractured party structures, and further erosion of democratic norms.

When political actors refuse to choose between public office and partisan advantage, Nigeria’s democracy becomes weaker not stronger. And in a nation that has fought hard for the rule of law and institutional integrity, that is a risk too great to tolerate.