John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, famously known as Lord Acton, once warned that “power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” That timeless observation, made in a 1887 letter to an Anglican bishop, continues to echo through global politics—and, increasingly, in Nigeria’s political landscape.
In Nigeria today, critics argue that politics has become a theatre of personal ambition, where laws and institutions are often bent to serve individual interests rather than public good. Nowhere is this debate more visible than in the Senate, where fresh controversy is brewing ahead of the 11th National Assembly.
At the centre of the storm is what critics have described as the “Akpabio Law”—a proposed amendment to the Senate Standing Rules reportedly designed to reshape eligibility for the position of Senate President and other principal offices.
The controversial “ranking” rule
The amendment reportedly stipulates that only senators who have served at least two full terms of eight years—one of which must immediately precede election—can qualify to become Senate President.
It further entrenches a strict ranking system for leadership positions, prioritising former presiding officers, principal officers, long-serving senators, ex-members of the House of Representatives, and first-time senators only when others are unavailable.
Another provision states that no senator can contest for principal offices unless they have served two consecutive terms immediately before nomination, effectively excluding incoming lawmakers from key leadership positions.
However, the Senate later adjusted parts of the amendment within 48 hours after concerns were raised about constitutional compliance, particularly Section 52 of the 1999 Constitution. Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele explained that leadership elections must precede the swearing-in of senators, correcting what was described as a procedural error. Despite the adjustment, the core ranking principle reportedly remains.
Power calculations ahead of 2027
Political observers believe the move is not merely procedural but part of wider positioning ahead of the 2027 elections and the emergence of the 11th Senate.
With President Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima expected to seek re-election, attention is already shifting to how key offices in the legislature will be zoned among Nigeria’s geopolitical regions.
Analysts suggest that the Senate Presidency may either remain in the South-South or be zoned to the South-East, depending on political negotiations within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
Senate President Godswill Akpabio is seen as a central figure in this emerging power arrangement, with speculation that the proposed rules could strengthen his chances of retaining the position beyond 2027.
Uzodimma’s parallel ambition
Imo State Governor Hope Uzodimma has also emerged as a significant player in the unfolding political calculations. A former senator who represented Orlu between 2011 and 2019, Uzodimma later became governor following a Supreme Court ruling that nullified the election of Emeka Ihedioha.
Now serving a second term as governor, Uzodimma is expected to complete his tenure in January 2028. However, political developments suggest he may be preparing for a return to the Senate after being nominated as APC candidate for Imo West Senatorial District ahead of the 11th National Assembly.
If elected, he would face the constitutional restriction that bars governors from holding another executive or salaried public office, meaning he would have to resign before taking a Senate seat.
His potential return to the Senate has fuelled speculation that he may also harbour ambitions for the Senate Presidency, setting up a possible power contest with Akpabio.
Legal and political hurdles
Despite the ambitions being discussed, constitutional provisions remain clear. Section 183 of the 1999 Constitution prohibits a sitting governor from holding another executive or salaried position. This means Uzodimma would have to vacate the governorship before assuming a Senate seat.
Furthermore, the newly proposed Senate ranking rules could complicate his path to leadership, depending on how strictly they are enforced or amended before the 11th Senate is inaugurated.
Political history, however, shows that Senate rules are flexible and often subject to internal adjustments based on prevailing interests.
History, precedents and internal politics
In 2015, similar controversies emerged when Godswill Akpabio became Minority Leader of the Senate despite objections from some lawmakers who cited ranking principles. The matter was eventually resolved politically, reinforcing the idea that Senate leadership is often determined more by negotiation than strict adherence to rules.
Regional tension and political sensitivity
The unfolding dynamics have also stirred subtle tensions between political blocs, particularly between the South-South and South-East regions.
Some South-South politicians reportedly view Uzodimma’s potential ambition to contest the Senate Presidency as a breach of past political understandings, where regional solidarity influenced zoning decisions.
Others argue that such agreements are political conventions rather than binding rules, and that every region must remain open to contesting leadership positions based on strength and negotiation.
Questions of legacy and governance
Beyond the power struggle, critics argue that the debate highlights a deeper issue in Nigeria’s democracy: the tendency for political elites to focus more on positions than performance.
Questions are being raised about the legislative achievements of key actors in the Senate and their impact on unemployment, youth development, social welfare, and national growth.
As the race toward the 11th Senate intensifies, observers say Nigerians will ultimately judge not only who occupies leadership positions, but also what those leaders have done in previous offices.
For now, the political chessboard is set, alliances are forming, and ambitions are sharpening. But as Lord Acton warned long ago, power remains a dangerous pursuit—especially when institutions are shaped more by individuals than by enduring principles.
