“It’s in Our Constitution” – NDC Defends Tough Anti-Defection Rule for Elected Members

The Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) has defended its strict anti-defection policy requiring all its candidates to commit, in writing, to remain in the party after winning elections or automatically forfeit their seats if they defect. 

According to the party says the rule is not new or targeted at individuals, but already embedded in its internal legal framework and binding on all aspirants.

The policy, which covers governorship candidates, members of the National Assembly, and other elective positions under the party’s platform, has continued to generate public debate over its implications for political freedom and party loyalty in Nigeria’s democratic space.

Speaking during an interview on Arise Television’s ‘Prime Time’ on Thursday, the National Publicity Secretary of the party, Osa Director, maintained that the provision is clearly stated in the party’s constitution and must be fully understood before anyone is cleared to contest under the party.

According to him, the requirement is not optional, as every candidate is expected to sign legal documents, including an affidavit, affirming commitment to remain within the party after being elected.

He stressed that this measure is aimed at strengthening party ideology and preventing post-election defections that often destabilise governance.

“Article 16 of NDC’s constitution clearly states the anti-defection policy.

“Any member of our party should have read through our constitution which clearly states in article 16, that they must give an affidavit to remain in the party once elected.

“Politicians are interested in elections, while statesmen are interested in nation building.

“NDC is a party interested in holistic growth and development of Nigeria. To that extent, we will encourage other parties to adopt this policy, to deepen the tentacles of democracy and the rule of law,” he said.

The party argued that the rule is designed to promote political stability and discourage what it describes as opportunistic party switching after elections, a practice it believes weakens governance and undermines voter trust.