Edo South at a Crossroads: Why APC’s ‘No Serial Losers’ Policy Should be Supported

By Prof Ikhimwin Osagiede

The latest declaration by the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Edo State—that it will deny tickets to “serial losers”—is more than a blunt political warning.

It is, in effect, a signal of a deeper strategic recalibration, one that could significantly reshape the contest for power, especially in Edo South Senatorial District.

Speaking on national television, the state chairman, Emperor Jarrett Tenebe, framed the decision as a necessary safeguard.

According to him, the party cannot afford to gamble on candidates with a history of electoral defeats if it hopes to meet its ambitious target of delivering 3.5 million votes for President Bola Tinubu.

At one level, the argument is rooted in pragmatism—elections are won by candidates who can mobilize, inspire, and convert support into votes. The endorsement of Adams Aliyu Oshiomhole—a figure widely regarded as a dependable vote-winner in Edo North—reinforces this logic.

In Tenebe’s framing, predictable electoral strength is now the party’s most prized asset.
Yet, beneath this rhetoric lies a more consequential opportunity—particularly for Edo South.

The call is a strategic opening for Edo South—long regarded as a politically vibrant but sometimes fragmented zone, now finds itself at a crossroads. The APC’s insistence on fielding only proven winners should constructively, compel the district to consolidate around its most viable political assets of incumbency.

Unlike in previous cycles where multiple aspirants diluted influence, the current moment favors cohesion. And crucially, Edo South is not starting from scratch—it already has a foundation to build upon: its incumbent federal legislators.

These lawmakers, by virtue of having secured electoral victories in the immediate past, fall squarely within the APC’s new preference for tested candidates. More importantly, they represent existing political structures—networks of supporters, grassroots mobilizers, and institutional experience—that can be scaled up rather than rebuilt.

Can Edo South progress from individual political strength to collective power?

The real question, then, is whether Edo South can transition from isolated political strongholds into a coordinated bloc.

Will the South develop a union that can build experienced public servants?

Historically, one of the district’s challenges has not been a lack of credible candidates, but the absence of sustained alignment among them.

Competing ambitions have often fractured what could otherwise have been a formidable voting base. Under the APC’s new doctrine, such fragmentation becomes a liability.

If the party is serious about avoiding “serial losers,” it implicitly rewards not just past victories, but the ability to maintain relevance and expand influence.

That is where coalition-building becomes decisive.

By aligning behind incumbent federal legislators—individuals who already command electoral legitimacy—Edo South can present a unified front behind the incumbent legislators who are yet to complete their minimal two-terms, that meets both the party’s criteria and with proven deliverables.

This would not only strengthen its bargaining power within the APC but also position the district as a central pillar in achieving the 3.5 million vote target.

Tenebe’s assertion that “the entire state” is aligning with the APC may be politically aspirational, but it underscores a broader trend: consolidation.

Across Edo, political actors appear to be gravitating toward structures perceived as viable and not mere Jamboree followers without electoral victory.

For Edo South, the implication is clear. Waiting on fragmented ambitions or recycling candidates with inconsistent electoral records risks marginalization under the party’s new rules.

In contrast, building on the coalition already represented by sitting federal legislators—Senate and House of Representatives offers a pathway to relevance and influence.

Such a coalition would not merely be about winning tickets; it would be about shaping outcomes. A united Edo South bloc could negotiate from a position of strength, influence candidate selection, and ensure that its interests are reflected in both party strategy and governance priorities.

Still, the APC’s hardline stance raises legitimate concerns.

However, within the immediate political calculus, the message is unmistakable: performance matters, and perception matters even more.

For Edo South, this is less a restriction than an invitation—an opportunity to redefine its political approach. Rather than dispersing its strength across multiple contenders, the district can leverage its existing winners, deepen collaboration, and project a cohesive identity within the All Progressives Congress.

In the end, the APC’s policy may be controversial, but it is also catalytic. It forces political actors to confront a fundamental question: adapt or be sidelined.

Edo South’s answer will likely determine not just its political fortunes in the coming elections, but its long-term relevance in the state’s power structure.

By building on the coalition provided by its incumbent federal legislators, the district has a chance to turn a restrictive party directive into a strategic advantage.

The alternative? Fragmentation in an era that rewards regional consolidation and this may prove far more costly.