2027: Tinubu’s Campaign Team and the Optics of Power
By Kabir Abdulsalam,
There are political appointments that generate applause, others that provoke anger, and then there are those that leave people asking a more uncomfortable question: what was the government thinking?
The unveiling of the All Progressives Congress Presidential Campaign Council for the 2027 election appears to fall into the third category.
What should have been a routine announcement of the party’s campaign machinery has instead triggered a broader conversation about public institutions, political loyalty, perception and trust.
Last weekend, the All Progressives Congress (APC) released the full list of members of its Presidential Campaign Council.
The list was made public by the Special Adviser on Information and Strategy to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, who announced the names of those appointed to serve on the council.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is chairman of the council, with Vice President Kashim Shettima and APC National Chairman Nentawe Yilwatda as vice-chairmen. Former Zamfara Governor Abdulaziz Yari is Director-General, while Imo State Governor Hope Uzodimma is secretary.
But shortly after the list was released, reports emerged that the Presidency was reviewing its composition following concerns about controversial inclusions, omissions and other errors.
That reaction is understandable. A campaign council is not merely an administrative structure. Every name and portfolio sends a message.
The real issue is therefore not simply whether those listed are legally permitted to participate in politics. It is whether some of them should be performing particular partisan roles while occupying sensitive public positions.
The easiest defence is that public officials are citizens with political rights. That is true. But legality should not be the only test.
A tax administrator is not the same as a retired politician. The head of a national identity institution is not simply another party member. The Attorney-General is not merely another lawyer.
The questions should also be whether the appointment is necessary, whether it creates a conflict or the appearance of one, and what message it sends to the public.
That is where politics meets public relations.
A good communications team should not only defend government decisions after controversy erupts. It should help prevent avoidable controversies before they happen.
The reported inclusion of Abisoye Coker-Odusote, Director-General of the National Identity Management Commission, as a senior figure in the campaign’s data structure illustrates the problem.
NIMC occupies a sensitive position in Nigeria’s identity architecture and manages highly personal and biometric information. Putting its head in charge of data for a partisan campaign inevitably raises concerns about the separation between government information and political activity.
There is no evidence that NIMC data has been transferred to the APC, and such an allegation should not be made without evidence.
But perception matters. The question a competent communications team should have asked before the list was published was simple: is this role worth the controversy it could generate?
Modern political campaigns depend heavily on data. That makes the independence and perceived neutrality of institutions holding citizens’ information particularly important.
The taxman and campaign fundraising. The reported appointment of Nigeria Revenue Service Chairman Zacch Adedeji as Deputy Director of Fundraising raises a similar concern.
Again, there is nothing to suggest that Adedeji cannot participate in politics. The issue is institutional.
The head of the country’s revenue authority is responsible for collecting public revenue, while a campaign fundraising directorate exists to mobilise money for a political party.
Even if the two responsibilities are kept completely separate, the arrangement creates an unnecessary perception problem.
There are many experienced politicians, businessmen and campaign financiers who could perform the role without creating the same questions.
In political communication, avoidable controversy is precisely what should be avoided.
Betta Edu, Olejeme and reputational risk
Read Also:
The inclusion of former Minister of Humanitarian Affairs Betta Edu as Director of Women Mobilisation has also attracted criticism because of the allegations and controversies surrounding her tenure. Ngozi Olejeme, listed for a South-South campaign role, has similarly attracted attention because of allegations associated with her public service record.
Here, the legal position is clear: an allegation is not a conviction, and people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
But political campaigns operate differently from courts.
A campaign is trying to persuade voters. It must therefore consider not only whether someone is legally eligible, but whether that person’s public reputation strengthens or weakens its message.
If a government wants to campaign on accountability and transparency, it should be careful about placing people with unresolved controversies at the centre of that message.
This is not a declaration of guilt. It is reputational risk management.
The same issue of perception arises when the appointment of Professor Mahmood Yakubu as Nigeria’s ambassador to Qatar.
Yakubu served as INEC chairman from 2015 to 2025 and supervised the 2023 general elections, including the presidential election won by Tinubu. The result was challenged in court, but the Supreme Court ultimately affirmed Tinubu’s victory.
The ambassadorial appointment does not, by itself, prove wrongdoing or demonstrate that Yakubu was rewarded for his role in the election.
He may be qualified for the diplomatic position, and the appointment may have been made entirely on professional considerations.
But political perception does not always follow legal conclusions.
For some Nigerians who remain suspicious of the 2023 election, the appointment can easily be interpreted as a reward from the administration whose victory his commission oversaw.
That interpretation may be unfair, but it was predictable.
A sophisticated government should anticipate such reactions, particularly when dealing with former electoral officials. Legal closure does not always produce public closure.
This feeds into a broader Nigerian political culture in which appointments are often viewed as rewards for political loyalty.
Support a candidate. Deliver your state. Mobilise voters. Defend the government. Then expect recognition.
Political parties naturally reward loyalists. The problem begins when political reward appears to take precedence over institutional credibility.
The distinction between these two statements is important: “He supported the President and was appointed because he is qualified.” And: “He was appointed because he supported the President.”
The appointment may be the same, but the political system they represent is very different.
That is why transparency and careful communication matter.
*The Abuja bubble*
There is also the danger of what might be called the Abuja bubble.
Governments surrounded by loyalists can become insulated from criticism. Opposition is dismissed as predictable, social-media outrage is ignored and uncomfortable questions are sometimes treated as political attacks.
But a president does not govern only supporters. He governs critics, undecided voters and people who did not vote for him. Winning the confidence of that broader public requires more than political loyalty; it requires credible institutions.
The President advisers therefore should be able to say, “This may be legal, but it is not wise.” That is not disloyalty. It is good governance.
Ultimately, the controversy over the campaign council is bigger than any individual name.
It is about maintaining a clear distinction between the party and the state.
The APC is a political party. The Federal Government belongs to all Nigerians.
A campaign needs politicians, fundraisers and strategists. Government institutions need neutrality, professionalism and public trust.
The two worlds will inevitably interact, but they should not become indistinguishable.
The Presidency now has an opportunity to review the campaign structure with that principle in mind.
It should remove avoidable conflicts, clarify sensitive roles and ensure that serving officials do not create unnecessary doubts about the institutions they lead.
Because in politics, legality may answer the question of whether something is permitted. Optics determine whether Nigerians believe it was appropriate.
And once public trust is damaged, repairing it is usually much harder than preventing the damage in the first place.
Kabir Abdulsalam is a Strategic Communications and Public Affairs Analyst.
He can be reached via: [email protected].
