The recent decision by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) National Executive Committee (NEC) to allocate the presidential ticket to the Southern region while retaining the party's National Chairman in the North has been widely interpreted as a clear vindication of the stance taken by the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister, Nyesom Wike, and the G-5 group in 2022. Lere Olayinka, the Minister’s Senior Special Assistant on Public Communications and Social Media, articulated this sentiment, questioning whether the party had not been vindicated now that it has acknowledged its prior error in not heeding Wike and the G-5’s counsel three years ago.

Recall that in 2022, Minister Wike and the G-5 bloc adamantly insisted that the PDP's presidential candidate and its National Chairman should not originate from the same geographical zone. Their argument was clear: since Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, hailing from the North, had emerged as the presidential candidate, then Senator Iyorchia Ayu, also from the North, ought to resign to allow for a National Chairman from the Southern part of the country. However, Ayu staunchly refused to step down, a position that was firmly supported by Atiku and his allies. This internal disagreement and the party’s failure to address the G-5’s demands were followed by an adverse electoral outcome for the PDP in the 2023 general elections, subsequently leading to a period of instability within the party post-elections.

Fast forward to the present, the PDP NEC has now formally resolved that, given the National Chairman of the party is zoned to the North, the party's 2027 Presidential ticket will be zoned to the South. This resolution prompts a critical question: Has the PDP not effectively reversed its previous position, essentially acknowledging its past misjudgment? The core of Wike's argument was straightforward: transfer the chairmanship to the South to enhance the party's prospects for winning the presidency. Yet, this advice was disregarded, with the party choosing to maintain both key positions in the same region, ultimately leading to their defeat.

The party has evidently recognized the error it made in 2022 and is now attempting to rectify it in 2025. However, there is a lingering concern about whether this course correction might be coming too late. A significant aspect of this debate revolves around the potential implications for future political arrangements: for this zoning strategy to be fully justified, the Southern region would ideally need to complete an eight-year presidential term, after which the presidency would then return to the North in 2031, suggesting a long-term rotational framework for power. The situation highlights the complexities of internal party politics and the long-term consequences of strategic decisions.