Connect with us

Featured

…Elections Will Test Nigeria’s Democracy…What The Economist Said of Nigeria’s 2015 Election

Published

on

The national and state elections due to begin in Nigeria on March 28th are likely to be the closest and most fiercely contested since the restoration of democracy in Africa’s most populous nation in 1999. There is a lack of confidence in the poll organisers, concern about the volatile environment in which voting will take place and anxiety about the undemocratic and belligerent tendencies of Nigerian politicians. It is virtually impossible to envisage an outcome to the election period that does not involve significant instability. Although we think Nigeria will just about negotiate the election period without a complete breakdown in security, there is a real possibility that the instability will be serious enough to break Nigeria’s democracy, or even split the country apart.

The run-up to the vote has been intense with provocative campaigning by politicians in both the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the main opposition, the All Progressives Congress (APC). Cause for concern has also come from the poor preparation by the Independent National Election Commission (INEC) for the crucial polls, which has undermined public confidence in the state agency’s ability to conduct smooth and fair voting in presidential and National Assembly polls on March 28th, followed by governorship and state assembly ballots on April 11th. A six-week postponement of the elections, announced a week before the original February 14th start date, stemmed from security concerns, particularly the Islamist insurgency in the north-east, and also INEC’s failure to distribute sufficient numbers of electoral cards to voters on time. The unease and apprehension has also affected the financial markets where share prices have been subdued and the Nigerian currency, the naira, has taken a battering as investors feel nervous about the impact of the ensuing power struggle on the stability of Africa’s largest economy.

Election-related instability is not a new phenomenon

Pre-elections jitters are not new in Nigeria. Virtually every major election in the country since independence from the UK in 1960 was preceded by some level of political turmoil, often owing to grandstanding by rent-seeking politicians. Furthermore, the nation’s electoral agency has on most voting occasions shown an incredible lack of preparedness, which in 2011 resulted in a week-long postponement of the polls, announced on the day voting was supposed to start. In addition, the aftermath of every major election has featured allegations of rigging and fraud, as well as some violence, which led to military coups in 1966 and 1983; and rioting that cost hundreds of lives in 2011.

Despite the drama and mayhem that have accompanied the four general elections held so far under the Fourth Republic, this current period of civilian governance has survived and arguably become more resilient and adept at weathering political storms. Indeed, this 15-year-old civilian republic has lasted longer than the preceding spell of army rule, although overall Nigeria has still been under military rule for more years than it has enjoyed democracy.

The stakes are higher than usual

Nonetheless, a number of factors make this year’s elections riskier than previous ones. This is the first time that the ruling party, which has won every presidential vote since 1999, faces an opposition that has broad support and reasonable prospects of victory. PDP candidates easily won past presidential contests, largely because they faced challengers who lacked broad support across Nigeria’s diverse ethnic and regional groupings. However, a former military ruler, Muhammadu Buhari, the candidate of the APC making his fourth consecutive attempt at the presidency, should this time benefit from the wider support of a party created in 2013 from a merger of three main opposition parties, with the prime purpose of wresting power from the PDP. Mr Buhari, a northern Muslim, took 32% of the overall vote in 2011, sweeping the largely Muslim north-west and north-east but performing poorly in the predominately Christian south. On March 28th the 72‑year‑old retired general is likely to do well in the south-west, a stronghold of one of the parties that make-up the APC, and do better in parts of the south-east. As for the 57‑year‑old president, Goodluck Jonathan, a southern Christian who won 59% of the 2011 vote, he is likely to once again get the support of his kinsmen in the oil-producing south and probably maintain strong performances in the south-east and in the ethnically mixed north-central zones. However, it is unclear to what extent the emergence of the APC alliance will erode his support in south-west, where in the past many voters have opted for opposition candidates in state elections while casting for the ruling party in the presidential ballot.

As with the 2011 elections, the 2015 polls are taking place against the background of the insurgency of Boko Haram, a Sunni Islamist fundamentalist group seeking to carve out an Islamic state in northern Nigeria. But the group has become stronger and poses a greater threat to democracy than it did four years ago. The mayhem it has caused in the north-east, including capturing several towns and villages, has raised doubts about the possibility of holding free elections in the worst-affected parts of the north-east. Since the postponement of the polls in mid-February, the Nigerian military, with the assistance of troops from Niger, Cameroon and Chad, have pushed to retake most of the territories under the militants’ control. Nonetheless, the security situation in the region remains precarious, with militants probably still able to strike with guerrilla attacks during the elections and to exacerbate any post-election violence in the country.

Neither side will willingly concede defeat

The flipside of concerns about Boko Haram and fears of a repeat of rioting in the north if Mr Buhari loses on March 28th is worry about a resurgence of ethnic nationalist militancy in the oil-producing Niger Delta if Mr Jonathan is defeated. Militants, who waged armed struggles for local control of mineral resources up until 2009, have threatened to resume their insurgency in the event of a Buhari presidency. Threats made by hardliners on both sides of the political divide to unleash catastrophe if their side loses is probably mostly sabre rattling that has come to be associated with election seasons in Nigeria. Nonetheless, the stakes are high. If Mr Buhari suffers a fourth presidential election defeat, he will probably not get another chance to achieve his ambition of returning to power through the ballot box. The retired general’s supporters will be less likely to accept defeat graciously if, as widely expected, the results of his latest bid for power are close, even if the courts back the PDP victory. On the other hand, if Mr Jonathan is defeated, Nigeria may enter uncharted territory, in which the ruling party, still in control of the state security apparatus, disputes the outcome of the presidential election.

There is not a feasible scenario in which Nigeria avoids significant post-election unrest. The question is over the magnitude of that unrest. Nigeria has shown a high threshold for remaining intact through previous periods of significant instability and this will probably remain true this time. However, the risk of a more substantial breakdown—precipitating a period of ungovernability, a coup or even civil war—are the highest of any time since the return to civilian rule in 1999.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

El-Rufai to Remain in ICPC Custody Till June

Published

on

By

Justice Darius Khobo of the Kaduna State High Court has adjourned the bail hearing of former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, to the first week of June, 2026.

El-Rufai is being arraigned on multiple charges bordering on alleged financial crime and abuse of office by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

“Similarly, another charge, number KDH/KAD/ICPC/01/26, against Mallam Nasir El-Rufa’i and one Amadu Sule (LEDA) has also been filed before a Kaduna State High Court in the Kaduna Judicial Division,” the ICPC said last month.

“The charges in the State High Court case range from abuse of office, fraud, and intent to commit fraud to conferring undue advantage, among others. Both charges were filed by the ICPC on the 18th of March, 2026.”

Speaking after the court session, counsel to the former governor, Ukpon Akpan, kicked against the lingering adjournment of the bail hearing by one presiding judge as politically motivated.

The high-profile case has drawn significant public attention, with heightened security presence observed around the court premises.

The former governor had arrived at the court at about 9 am in a convoy accompanied by ICPC officials and operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).

During the proceedings, supporters of the former governor gathered outside the courtroom, while security agencies maintained order and restricted movement within the vicinity.

Inside the courtroom, journalists, as usual, were not allowed, as proceedings are expected to focus on arguments presented by both the defence and prosecution regarding the bail request.

At the last sitting, the defence team had maintained that their client poses no flight risk and is willing to comply with all conditions set by the court.

Meanwhile, the prosecution has urged the court to carefully consider the gravity of the charges.

The 66-year-old former governor of Kaduna has been in ICPC custody since February 19 following his release by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

El-Rufai, a former minister of the FCT, was, however, released on March 27 based on compassionate grounds following his mother’s death.

Continue Reading

Featured

Timi Frank Petitions US, Demands Gbajabiamila’s Resignation over ‘Anti-Democratic’ Remarks

Published

on

By

Political activist, Comrade Timi Frank, has called on the United States government to investigate and sanction the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, over alleged actions capable of undermining Nigeria’s democracy.

Frank’s demand followed a viral video in which Gbajabiamila was quoted as telling Hon Leke Abejide, during his wife’s 50th birthday that: “Don’t come to APC. Stay in ADC and scatter them. We like what you’re doing… stay in ADC and win your election… bring Bala Gombe, and we’ll support him. Good luck in court.”

Describing the remarks as “reckless” and dangerous, the former Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), said they point to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition parties and erode democratic institutions.

“Your statement, as Chief of Staff, raises serious concerns about the determination by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s regime to truncate democracy,” he said, adding that “inference can be made that there is an infringement on the independence of the judiciary.”

He warned that any suggestion that courts could be influenced “undermines public confidence in democratic institutions,” citing references to political actors, including Leke Abejide, as requiring clarification to avoid “dangerous interpretations.”

Frank argued that Gbajabiamila’s comments effectively confirm the Presidency’s involvement in crises rocking opposition parties such as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Social Democratic Party (SDP), New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

“When a Chief of Staff speaks, it reflects the body language of the President. This points to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition and consolidate power,” he said.

He further claimed that state influence, including the use of the judiciary, is being deployed against opposition parties. “The audacity of the statement suggests nothing will happen even if opposition parties are destabilised. That is dangerous,” he added.

Frank described Gbajabiamila as “an alter ego of the President” who had “displayed the arrogance of power,” insisting that public office holders must uphold restraint, respect for the rule of law and constitutional order.

He also urged U.S. authorities to probe Gbajabiamila’s activities and financial dealings.

“As an American citizen, he should be held accountable. We want to know if he is meeting his tax obligations in line with his earnings in Nigeria,” Frank said, describing him as “a bad ambassador of the United States.”

“We want to be sure that all earnings, including those from official and business engagements in Nigeria, are properly declared and taxed,” he added.

On accountability, Frank insisted resignation was the only honourable option.

“We call for your resignation with immediate effect. If such a statement were made in the United States, the official involved would have resigned forthwith,” he said.

He disclosed plans to petition the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, stressing that “those entrusted with leadership must reflect humility, constitutional awareness and respect for separation of powers.”

“Power is transient, but institutions must endure. Any comment that diminishes their independence must be corrected,” he added.

The call comes amid rising concerns over the stability of Nigeria’s multiparty system and allegations of increasing pressure on opposition parties.

Comrade Timi Frank is the ULMWP Ambassador (East Africa and Middle East) and Senior Advisor, Global Friendship City Association (GFCA), USA.

Continue Reading

Featured

Alleged Coup Plotters Get April 22 Date for Trial, Slammed with 13-Count Charge

Published

on

By

The Federal Government has filed a 13-count charge before the Federal High Court in Abuja against a retired Major General, a retired Naval Captain, a serving police inspector, and three others over an alleged coup plot and acts of terrorism.

The alleged coup plotters, are scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow (Wednesday), April 22, before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Those named in the charge are Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana (rtd), Captain (NN) Erasmus Ochegobia Victor (rtd), Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni, and Abdulkadir Sani.

Also listed as a defendant, but said to be at large, is former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

The charge, filed by the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and signed by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, accuses the defendants of offences ranging from treason and terrorism to failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.

At the centre of the case is an allegation that the defendants conspired in 2025 to undermine the Nigerian state.

According to the charge, they “conspired with one another to levy war against the state to overawe the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” an offence punishable under Section 37(2) of the Criminal Code.

The prosecution further alleged that the defendants had prior knowledge of a planned treasonable act involving one Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Ma’aji and others but failed to alert authorities.

The charge stated that they, “knowing that and intended to commit treason, did not give the information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President or a Peace Officer.”

In another count, the defendants were accused of failing to take preventive steps, as they allegedly “did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence.”

Beyond treason, the Federal Government is prosecuting the defendants for terrorism-related offences under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The charge alleged that they “conspired with one another to commit an act of terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Particularly, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim and Zekeri Umoru are accused of participating in meetings linked to terrorist activities.

Prosecutors claim they acted “in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilise the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The charge also accused the defendants of providing support for terrorism, alleging that they “knowingly and indirectly rendered support” to facilitate acts of terror.

In addition, the prosecution alleged a deliberate suppression of intelligence, stating that the defendants “had information which would be of material assistance in preventing the commission of the act of terrorism but failed to disclose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable.”

The case further traced financial transactions allegedly linked to terrorism financing, with multiple defendants accused of handling proceeds of unlawful activities.
Bukar Kashim Goni is alleged to have “indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N50,000,000, which forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act, to wit: terrorism financing,” while Abdulkadir Sani allegedly retained N2 million from a similar source.

Zekeri Umoru, according to the charge, “without going through a financial institution accepted a cash payment of the sum of N10,000,000,” and also retained an additional N8.8 million suspected to be proceeds of terrorism financing.

Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim was also accused of taking possession of N1 million linked to the same alleged scheme.

All financial-related counts were brought under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The 13-count charge presents what prosecutors describe as a coordinated network involving security personnel, civilians, and a politically exposed individual, allegedly connected to activities threatening national security.

Continue Reading

Trending