A founding member of the All Progressives Congress, Osita Okechukwu, has faulted former Vice President Atiku Abubakar over his recent criticism of zoning, describing the position as contradictory and politically self-serving.
Okechukwu said Atiku’s claim that zoning could be “self-defeating” amounted to self-denial, arguing that the former vice president was among the major beneficiaries of Nigeria’s power-sharing arrangement.
The former Director-General of the Voice of Nigeria stated this on Tuesday while reacting to Atiku’s comments on the 2027 presidential race.
According to him, zoning remains a vital political convention that promotes national unity, equity, inclusion and stability across the country.
“How can one of the foremost beneficiaries of the zoning convention suddenly deny its profound significance in promoting national cohesion, inclusion, equity, peace and justice?” Okechukwu queried.
He argued that without the zoning arrangement, Atiku might not have emerged as vice president during the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
“If there was no zoning arrangement, could Atiku have become Vice President?” he asked.
Okechukwu also recalled Atiku’s defection from the Peoples Democratic Party to the APC ahead of the 2015 general election after former President Goodluck Jonathan secured the PDP presidential ticket.
“Has he forgotten why he stormed out of the PDP presidential primary process in 2014 and joined us in APC after President Goodluck Jonathan emerged as the party’s candidate?” he added.
The APC chieftain further criticised Atiku’s argument questioning the possibility of a Southern opposition candidate defeating a sitting Southern president in 2027.
He described the remark as divisive identity politics, warning that such rhetoric undermines the spirit behind the zoning principle.
According to him, zoning was designed to reduce regional tension and foster political balance across the federation.
Okechukwu also dismissed Atiku’s claim that the South would have held power for about 18 years by 2027 compared to the North’s 10 years in the Fourth Republic.
He said the argument ignored the broader historical context of Nigeria’s leadership since independence in 1960.
“That statement reflects selective amnesia because it ignores the historical reality that Northern Nigeria presided over the affairs of the country for more than four decades since independence,” he said.
He added that issues of fairness and equity should not be interpreted through “convenient arithmetic” or narrow political interests.
