In Nigerian politics, loyalty is often a luxury and survival is the only constant law.
The recent defections of Governor Siminalayi Fubara of Rivers State and Governor Ademola Adeleke of Osun State have reshaped national political conversations.
Though their circumstances differ, their decisions reflect one undeniable truth about Nigerian politics: when survival clashes with loyalty, survival always wins.
These defections are not just political moves, they are survival strategies rooted in party instability, godfather dominance, legal risks, and the raw struggle for relevance.
Governor Ademola Adeleke’s exit from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is best understood through the lens of Nigeria’s electoral history.
His defection is not driven by internal betrayal, party envy, or factional fights.
It is driven by something far more dangerous:
PDP’s unresolved leadership crisis could legally cost him his seat.
The party’s lingering disputes over national chairmanship, parallel congresses, and legitimacy battles pose a direct threat to Adeleke’s second term ambition.
In Nigeria, a governor does not only fear losing at the polls; he fears losing after winning, through the courts.
Adeleke remembers Zamfara 2019. Nigeria remembers it too.
The All Progressives Congress (APC) swept the elections in Zamfara, but due to faulty primaries and leadership disputes, the Supreme Court disqualified the entire APC lineup.
The opposition took all the seats without contesting at the polls.
That judgment remains one of the most catastrophic legal losses in Nigerian political history. And Adeleke knows this:
if PDP goes into the 2026 election with unresolved leadership problems, his mandate could collapse the same way Zamfara’s did.
Faced with that kind of legal uncertainty, Adeleke chose certainty.
He defected not because he could not win but because PDP’s internal instability could make even victory meaningless.
It was not disloyalty.
It was self-preservation.
In the case Of Fubara, Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s defection was forged in a different fire, one fueled by personal conflict, structural loss, and the overwhelming shadow of a political godfather.
To understand Fubara’s move, one must understand the force that shapes Rivers politics:
Nyesom Wike.
For years, Wike has been the single most influential political figure in Rivers State.
But his influence does not stop within the PDP; it stretches deep into the APC, where he holds significant sway through powerful alliances.
This influence became unmistakable when 16 pro-Wike lawmakers defected to the APC not because they believed in APC ideology, but because Wike signaled it.
Their move destabilized Fubara politically and sent a message loud enough to shake the Brick House:
A sitting governor had lost control of his own Assembly.
Within the PDP, Fubara had:
no party structure,
no legislative backing,
no guarantee of a second-term ticket,
and no ability to counter Wike’s dominance.
He had become a paperweight governor, powerful only on paper, powerless in political reality.
The lawmakers’ defection created a new power equation:
Wike controlled PDP.
Wike influenced APC.
Wike controlled the Assembly bloc.
Wike controlled local structures.
To secure a second term, Fubara could no longer fight.
He had to align.
Defecting to the APC became not a rebellion, but a strategic surrender , an attempt to regain Wike’s favor or at least reduce his hostility.
Without that, his survival was impossible.
His move was not ambition; it was self-defense.
Adeleke and Fubara defected for different reasons:
Adeleke fled from a potential legal disaster that could nullify his mandate.
Fubara fled from a political godfather whose power extended across two major parties.
Yet both actions point to one shared truth about Nigerian politics:
Power belongs not to parties, but to structures. And structures always determine survival.
Their defections reveal the deeper realities of Nigeria’s political system:
Party instability is deadly.
Godfathers can make or unmake governors.
Lawmakers follow influence, not ideology.
Courts can overturn electoral victories.
Political loyalty is conditional, not permanent.
Ultimately, both governors acted out of the same instinct: self-preservation in a system where survival is the supreme principle.
The defections of Fubara and Adeleke are not stories of betrayal or fickleness. They are stories of men navigating a system where:
loyalty is negotiable,
alliances are fluid,
power flows through structures,
and governors must adapt or be consumed.
In the end, their moves confirm one undeniable lesson,
one that defines Nigerian politics more than party names or campaign slogans.
Aderibigbe Yisahu Ajibola writes from Oyo state.
