Equally troubling is the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which is perceived as a toothless body—deeply corrupt, inefficient, and under immense pressure. This perception feeds public disillusionment and skepticism, eroding confidence in the electoral process and allowing confusion and chaos to fester.
In the Midst of Political Violence, Under the Shadow of Buhari and Tinubu’s Ignitable and Explosive Words, Amidst the belligerent Self-Interest Fight Between Obaseki, Shaibu, Ighodalo, and Okpebholo, and Within the Matrix of Media Manipulation: The Complex Challenges of Democratic Governance in Nigeria
The events of July 19, 2024, in Edo State, Nigeria, underscore the critical need for democratic values to be upheld in the governance and electoral processes of the country. The attack on the convoy of Philip Shaibu and Senator Monday Okpebholo highlights the importance of peace, security, and the rule of law as foundational elements of a democratic society. As a psychologist with no intention of taking sides with any parties involved, especially Godwin Obaseki, Philip Shaibu, and Senator Monday Okpebholo, my goal is to advocate for a democratic approach to electoral matters.
Democratic values include the right to peaceful assembly, free speech, and the protection of individual rights. These values are essential for a healthy political environment where citizens can engage in political discourse, support their chosen candidates, and participate in elections without fear of violence or intimidation. However, the recent events in Edo State starkly demonstrate how these values are under siege.
Throughout Nigeria’s election history, violence has plagued the political landscape, creating an environment of fear and mistrust. The decision to go to an airport and start shooting is primitive at best, reflecting a fundamental disregard for the sanctity of life and the democratic process. The tragic loss of life and the accusations of orchestrated violence highlight a severe breakdown of democratic principles. It is imperative that all parties involved in the political process, including candidates, their supporters, and government officials, adhere to democratic norms and respect the law. The use of violence not only undermines the democratic process but also poses a serious threat to the safety and security of citizens.
The sad reality is that citizens cannot rely on the police or the judiciary for protection and justice. Both institutions are frequently used as political footballs, subjected to intimidation, fear, bribes, and undue pressure from political actors. In a functional democracy, incidents such as the violent confrontation at the airport would prompt immediate and transparent responses from law enforcement agencies. Instead, citizens are left in the dark, unsure of whom to trust.
The presidency, too, stands paralyzed in the face of this turmoil. The last election, which brought in President Tinubu, was marred by similar primitive tactics: thuggery, electoral manipulation, and a willingness to use any means necessary to seize power. With the current presidency being All Progressives Congress (APC), there is a looming fear that federal might will be wielded to influence the upcoming Edo election, further exacerbating tensions and inciting violence among rival political factions. The potential for thuggery on both sides threatens to spiral into chaos, perpetuating a cycle of violence that undermines any hope for stability.
Equally troubling is the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which is perceived as a toothless body—deeply corrupt, inefficient, and under immense pressure. This perception feeds public disillusionment and skepticism, eroding confidence in the electoral process and allowing confusion and chaos to fester. INEC’s inability to conduct free, fair, and transparent elections has become a significant hindrance to Nigeria’s democratic development.
The judicial landscape adds another layer of complexity and confusion, a phenomenon I colloquially refer to as the “Abuja judge” syndrome. Unlike in any democratic nation, Nigeria experiences judicial interferences that bewilder the populace, particularly concerning electoral matters. A salient example of this is the recent ruling by the Federal High Court in Abuja, which nullified the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) primary election in Edo State, disqualifying Asue Ighodalo as the party’s governorship candidate. Justice Inyang Ekwo declared the process flawed, creating uncertainty. In a bizarre twist, another Abuja judge, Justice James Omotosho, upheld Ighodalo’s nomination, compounding the confusion.
The legal absurdity deepens further, as Justice Omotosho also ruled that the removal of Philip Shaibu from office as Deputy Governor of Edo State and the subsequent appointment of Comrade Ganiyu Johnson Omobayo Godwins as his replacement by Governor Godwin Obaseki was illegal. Despite this ruling, the current deputy governor, Omobayo Godwins, continues to assert that he is the rightful deputy governor to Obaseki. As we speak, Edo State has two deputy governors, with Shaibu, who is PDP like Obaseki, publicly supporting APC. This bizarre situation has resulted in deep tensions, with Shaibu and the APC of Edo State accusing Governor Obaseki of being behind the violent attack at the airport.
In all these instances, it is evident how the people of Edo State are being confused by conflicting judicial decisions, which undermine the clarity and integrity of the electoral process. This situation highlights the urgent need for judicial reforms and a clear separation of powers to ensure that the judiciary upholds the democratic principles of fairness and justice. The conflicting rulings not only create chaos but also erode the public’s trust in the judiciary as an impartial arbiter of justice.
These ongoing events serve as a clarion call for all stakeholders in Nigeria’s democracy to actively work towards de-escalating tensions and promoting a culture of peace and tolerance. Political differences should be resolved through dialogue and the legal process, rather than through violence. Political leaders must lead by example, demonstrating a commitment to democratic values and the rule of law.
The need for democratic values is not limited to election periods; it is a continuous requirement for the stability and progress of any society. The events in Edo State are a stark reminder that without a commitment to these values, the democratic process can be severely compromised, leading to chaos and insecurity. Continuous civic education and engagement are essential to foster a culture of democracy and respect for the rule of law.
As Nigeria prepares for the gubernatorial election on September 21, it is vital that all parties involved demonstrate a commitment to democratic principles, ensuring that the election is conducted peacefully and that the will of the people is accurately reflected in the outcome. The promotion of democratic values is essential for the long-term success and development of the nation.
International observers, including the United Nations, numerous world donors, and democratic institutions, have continuously raised alarms about the severe electoral difficulties plaguing Nigeria, including electoral violence, thuggery, police brutality, and judicial compromises. These world powers have attempted to educate and train Nigerian election officials on proper electoral practices, yet the entrenched issues persist, as highlighted by the airport incident. This troubling reality suggests that these problems are likely to worsen, particularly as election day approaches.
In a humorous, yet deeply realistic vein, one might wonder if it’s time to consider that these key players take some anti-mood medications to enhance self-control and maintain cool heads, at least during the election periods. While this suggestion is made in jest, it underscores the desperate need for serious measures to ensure peaceful and democratic elections in Nigeria. The commitment to democratic values must transcend mere rhetoric and manifest in concrete actions that protect and promote the integrity of the electoral process.
In 2022, while in London as part of his campaign, President Bola Tinubu articulated a deeply troubling psychological model that has since become a focal point of political discourse in Nigeria. In a video captured during a meeting with top party operatives, Tinubu declared, “Political power is not going to be served in a restaurant. They don’t serve it a la carte. At all cost, fight for it, grab it and run with it.” This statement reflects a mindset that views political power not as a responsibility to be earned and wielded with care, but as a prize to be aggressively seized.
Amid this backdrop of inflammatory rhetoric, the situation in Edo State is further compounded by judicial oddities and confusion from figures like Judges Omotosho and Ekwo. Their contradictory rulings have contributed to a climate of legal uncertainty and chaos, eroding trust in the judicial system. The rampant political violence witnessed in the state, fueled by these judicial inconsistencies, underscores the dangerous intersection of legal and political dysfunction.
In addition to the judicial and violent turmoil, the explosive rhetoric from both Tinubu and former President Muhammadu Buhari exacerbates the situation. Tinubu’s language, though perhaps intended to energize his supporters, has been widely interpreted as a call for aggressive and violent tactics in the pursuit of power. His metaphor of fighting for power “at all cost” sets a dangerous precedent that undermines democratic principles and fosters a win-at-all-costs mentality. This rhetoric not only polarizes political factions but also intensifies conflicts, contributing to the erosion of democratic norms and stability.
Strategic media manipulation further complicates the scenario, as political actors and their allies use media platforms to sway public opinion and heighten tensions. This manipulation, combined with the volatile political climate, creates a perfect storm for escalating violence and conflict, distorting the democratic process and deepening public confusion.
In a related vein, former President Muhammadu Buhari’s 2012 statement about the 2015 elections adds another layer to the disturbing narrative of political rhetoric in Nigeria. Buhari ominously warned that if certain conditions were not met, the 2015 elections could become “bloody.” He was quoted saying: “God willing by 2015, something will happen. They either conduct a free and fair election or they go a very disgraceful way. If what (happened) in 2011 should again happen in 2015, by the grace of God, the dog and the baboon would all be soaked in blood.”
Buhari’s statement reflects a broader culture of aggressive rhetoric that treats political contests as battles rather than democratic processes. The use of such stark and violent language contributes to a climate of fear and tension, reinforcing the idea that political power is to be won through conflict and bloodshed rather than through peaceful and fair means. This mindset, coupled with the recent incendiary rhetoric from Tinubu and the ongoing judicial and political turmoil in Edo State, highlights a troubling trend in Nigerian politics where the democratic process is increasingly overshadowed by violence, intimidation, and manipulation.
The statements made by Bola Tinubu in 2022 and Muhammadu Buhari in 2012, though separated by context and time, both reflect a troubling undercurrent in Nigerian political discourse. Tinubu’s metaphor of fighting for power and Buhari’s warning of potential bloodshed if certain conditions were not met highlight a political environment where the language of conflict and aggression is used to describe the pursuit and exercise of power. This rhetoric can contribute to a climate of fear and tension, undermining the principles of democratic governance and peaceful political competition.
The implications of these statements for Edo State are profound. The perception that political power is the ultimate prize, to be won by any means necessary, can lead to a disregard for the democratic process and the rule of law. This mindset can fuel a competitive and adversarial approach to politics, where the focus is on winning at all costs rather than on the collective good and the democratic process.
The use of aggressive language and metaphors by political leaders can indeed shape the national psyche and influence the behavior of their followers. When leaders speak of fighting for power or warn of bloodshed, it can create a sense of urgency and conflict that may justify or normalize violent actions in the pursuit of political goals. This can be particularly dangerous in a country like Nigeria, where ethnic, religious, and regional tensions already exist and can be easily exploited.
The situation in Edo State, as it prepares for the September gubernatorial election, is a microcosm of these national issues. The confusion and legal battles surrounding the candidacy and governance of the state reflect a broader dysfunction within the political system. The perception that political power is the ultimate prize, to be won by any means necessary, can lead to a disregard for the democratic process and the rule of law.
To address these challenges, it is essential for Nigeria’s political leaders to adopt a more responsible and democratic discourse. This involves promoting a culture of respect for democratic institutions, encouraging dialogue and consensus-building, and emphasizing the importance of peaceful political competition. Additionally, there is a need for robust civic education and engagement to ensure that the electorate is informed and empowered to participate in the democratic process without resorting to violence.
Ultimately, the health of Nigeria’s democracy depends on the collective commitment of its leaders and citizens to uphold democratic values and principles. By fostering a political environment that values peace, justice, and the rule of law, Nigeria can overcome its current challenges and build a more stable and democratic society.
The statements made by Bola Tinubu and Muhammadu Buhari, despite their differences in context and intent, both contribute to a narrative that positions political power as something to be fiercely contested, potentially without regard for democratic principles or the peaceful resolution of conflicts. The use of aggressive language and metaphors by political leaders can indeed shape the national psyche and influence the behavior of their followers. When leaders speak of fighting for power or warn of bloodshed, it can create a sense of urgency and conflict that may justify or normalize violent actions in the pursuit of political goals.
This can be particularly dangerous in a country like Nigeria, where ethnic, religious, and regional tensions already exist and can be easily exploited. The situation in Edo State, as it prepares for the September gubernatorial election, is a microcosm of these national issues. The confusion and legal battles surrounding the candidacy and governance of the state reflect a broader dysfunction within the political system. The perception that political power is the ultimate prize, to be won by any means necessary, can lead to a disregard for the democratic process and the rule of law.
In the intricate labyrinth of Nigerian politics, the intertwining of judicial decisions, political violence, media manipulation, and the police’s quandary in the face of conflicting political interests poses a formidable challenge to democratic governance. Judges, in their efforts to uphold the law, have inadvertently complicated the electoral and legal terrains, sowing seeds of confusion and uncertainty.