Why it takes time to choose running mates – Prof Muhammad
Candidates for executive offices often take their time before announcing their running mates. Professor Murtala Muhammad of the North-West University, Kano, and a national officer of the Nigerian Political Science Association (NPSA), explained why the process takes time, saying the delay is no accident. He said picking a running mate was a high-stake political negotiation […]
Candidates for executive offices often take their time before announcing their running mates. Professor Murtala Muhammad of the North-West University, Kano, and a national officer of the Nigerian Political Science Association (NPSA), explained why the process takes time, saying the delay is no accident. He said picking a running mate was a high-stake political negotiation shaped by party factions, godfathers and regional interests, which are processes that can make or break party unity ahead of elections.
Why do candidates often delay announcing their running mates after winning party primaries?
The prolonged delay in announcing their running mates reflects the complex nature of political negotiations in Nigeria’s democratic process. The office of the deputy governor is not merely a constitutional requirement; it is a strategic political position that plays a critical role in coalition building, conflict management and electoral calculations.
Although a governor may have secured the party ticket through the primary election, the process of selecting a running mate often requires extensive consultations aimed at accommodating various interests within and outside the party. The difficulty arises from the need to balance competing political interests. Governors must carefully manage demands from party factions, influential stakeholders, political godfathers, interest groups and regional blocs.
What are the peculiarities in picking a vice presidential candidate?
Fundamentally, the same principles apply. The transition following the illness and eventual death of President Yar’Adua in 2010 highlighted the importance of selecting individuals with demonstrable leadership capacity rather than merely electoral utility.
Consequently, the central debate is whether vice presidential selection should primarily serve electoral objectives or governance objectives. Ideally, democratic consolidation requires a balance between both considerations. A running mate should not only help win elections but also possess the competence, experience and legitimacy required to govern if circumstances demand.
Are there premature risks involved?
Since the choice of one individual inevitably excludes others who may have expected consideration, premature decisions can generate resentment and internal divisions capable of weakening the party’s electoral prospects. The period following the primary election therefore becomes a phase of intense bargaining and consensus building designed to preserve party unity.
Given Nigeria’s political experience, what factors should be considered in the selection process?
Several factors are considered. Geopolitical balancing remains one of the most important as parties often seek to ensure equitable representation among senatorial districts or zones within a state. Religious and ethnic considerations also feature prominently, particularly in diverse states where identity politics influences voting behaviour. Beyond these, governors evaluate the electoral value of potential running mates, including their popularity, grassroots support networks, political structures and capacity to mobilise votes. Competence, administrative experience, leadership qualities, loyalty, trustworthiness and even financial and organisational capacity are equally important in determining who eventually emerges as the preferred candidate.
But so far, are these factors put into consideration while choosing running mates?
The selection process is influenced by a wide range of actors. Party leadership at both state and national levels frequently seeks to ensure that the choice aligns with broader electoral strategies and internal power arrangements. Political godfathers and influential stakeholders often demand input because of their contributions to the governor’s emergence. Former governors, elder statesmen, legislators, local government leaders and party executives also exert considerable influence by lobbying for candidates from their constituencies or political blocs. In some cases, traditional rulers, community leaders, religious leaders and even national political calculations shape the final decision.
We have witnessed instances where running mates are picked largely for geopolitical balancing but are later sidelined after victory. How can this be avoided?
This phenomenon raises important questions about the distinction between electoral politics and governance politics. Running mates are often selected to maximise electoral support while their influence after elections depends largely on the political arrangements established within government.
Consequently, once electoral objectives have been achieved, the rationale for their inclusion may diminish, creating conditions for marginalisation. This reflects a broader weakness in the institutionalisation of executive power sharing arrangements in many emerging democracies.
Addressing this challenge requires a shift from symbolic representation to substantive participation. Political parties should prioritise competence, administrative capacity, policy expertise and leadership qualities alongside representational considerations. Running mates should be selected, not merely because they satisfy demographic expectations but because they can contribute meaningfully to governance.
The experience of the Obasanjo administration provides an instructive example. During the early years of that administration, Vice President Atiku Abubakar played visible roles in economic reform initiatives, privatisation programmes and policy coordination. Although political disagreements later emerged, the arrangement demonstrated that vice presidents could function as active participants in governance rather than ceremonial office holders.
A second critical issue concerns institutional design. Nigeria’s constitution provides limited clearly defined executive responsibilities for vice presidents and deputy governors beyond succession and delegated functions. This often creates ambiguity regarding their roles. Institutional reforms that provide clearer responsibilities and greater accountability mechanisms could strengthen their relevance within the executive structure.
Sustainable democratic development requires executive partnerships founded on competence, trust, institutional clarity and a shared commitment to effective governance rather than temporary electoral expediency.
What reforms would you suggest to improve the process of selecting running mates?
To improve the process, political parties should institutionalise transparent and objective criteria for selecting running mates. Rather than relying primarily on elite bargaining and informal negotiations, parties should prioritise competence, integrity, proper representation and governance capacity. Strengthening internal party democracy through wider consultation with party members would enhance legitimacy and reduce post selection disputes. Greater emphasis should also be placed on leadership capability, recognising that a deputy governor is not only an electoral asset but also a potential successor and key governance partner. Furthermore, political education is necessary to reduce excessive dependence on ethnic, regional and religious considerations in political decision-making.
Can the right thing be done in the next elections?
As long as identity-based calculations dominate electoral politics, governors will continue to face enormous pressure from competing interests during the selection process. Encouraging citizens and political actors to focus more on competence and performance would contribute to a more merit-based political culture.
Constitutional and party reforms could encourage earlier and more transparent nomination procedures. Such reforms would reduce uncertainty, limit speculation and strengthen public confidence in the democratic process. While consultations and negotiations are inevitable in a plural society such as Nigeria, a more transparent and institutionalised approach to selecting running mates would promote accountability, party cohesion and good governance.
Selection of a vice presidential candidate is considerably more complex because it operates within a broader national context and carries far-reaching implications for electoral success, governance and national cohesion. In both cases, political actors consider factors such as loyalty, competence, political experience, electoral value and representational balance.
However, vice presidential selection introduces additional layers of strategic calculation because it must accommodate Nigeria’s highly pluralistic social structure and the competing interests of diverse political constituencies.
The choice of a vice presidential candidate represents a coalition building mechanism designed to aggregate support across regional, ethnic, religious and political divides. This explains why vice presidential selections in Nigeria often generate intense public debate. Historical examples such as the Obasanjo-Atiku ticket in 1999 and the Yar’adua-Jonathan ticket in 2007 reflected deliberate efforts to construct broad-based national coalitions capable of enhancing electoral legitimacy and promoting inclusiveness.
One of the most contentious issues in contemporary Nigerian politics is whether considerations of identity should continue to outweigh competence and governance capacity. While advocates of representational politics argue that balancing promotes inclusion and national integration, critics contend that excessive reliance on ethnic, religious and regional considerations may undermine meritocracy and governance effectiveness.
Another critical issue concerns succession politics. The vice president is constitutionally the first in line to assume presidential authority in the event of death or resignation.
Why do you think there is controversy over President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima running with him?
The controversy reflects broader debates about power sharing, political loyalty, representation and electoral strategy within Nigeria’s evolving democratic landscape. In many presidential systems, incumbent presidents possess considerable discretion in choosing their running mates. However, in Nigeria, such decisions are rarely viewed as purely personal or strategic choices; they are often interpreted as signals regarding elite bargains, regional inclusion and the distribution of political power.
Those who support the retention of Vice President Kashim Shettima argue that electoral partnerships should be sustained where loyalty, performance and political stability are evident. From this perspective, replacing a vice president could be interpreted as a disruption of established political understandings and may generate dissatisfaction among stakeholders who perceive the existing arrangement as reflecting broader regional or political interests.
Conversely, others argue that politics is dynamic rather than static. Electoral environments evolve, voter preferences change and political parties frequently reassess their strategies in response to emerging realities. Comparative political experience demonstrates that incumbent leaders sometimes alter their tickets in pursuit of broader electoral objectives or changing political calculations.
The controversy also reflects unresolved debates surrounding the relationship between electoral pragmatism and democratic representation. Should vice presidential selection be determined primarily by political performance and governance outcomes, or should it continue to reflect geopolitical balancing and elite accommodation? This question remains central to contemporary discussions of Nigerian politics.
While many citizens advocate issue-based politics, electoral competition often remains intertwined with regional, ethnic and religious considerations. As a result, any discussion concerning a vice presidential candidate inevitably transcends individual personalities and becomes a broader conversation about inclusion, equity and political representation within the federation.