By Anthony
Kindly share:
There are elections, and there are political wars disguised as elections.
What is unfolding around the Osun State governorship election deserves to be examined beyond the familiar language of campaigns, party rivalry and electoral competition. It raises a bigger question for Nigeria: what happens to democracy when the machinery of political power appears determined to overwhelm everything standing in its way to victory?
The APC has every right to contest, mobilise, persuade and seek victory. So does every other political party. If the APC wins fairly, its victory should be respected. If it loses, the verdict of the people should equally be respected.
The issue is not who wins; it is how the winner emerges.
Let the parties campaign. Let candidates present their records and programmes. Let political leaders mobilise. Let the people decide. But let the contest be free, fair, peaceful and credible. That is where Osun becomes troubling.
The reported deployment of tens of thousands of police, military, civil defence and other security personnel for a governorship election is difficult to ignore.
Of course, elections require security. Voters must be protected, polling units secured and electoral materials safeguarded.
But there is a legitimate national question:
Why does the Nigerian state suddenly possess the capacity to mobilise such an enormous security presence for an election while Nigerians continue to endure banditry, terrorism and kidnapping? Why should a governorship election require such a massive show of force when communities across the country continue to plead for protection? Why did abducted students in Oyo and elsewhere not receive the same urgency? Why are communities threatened by bandits and terrorists not surrounded by comparable levels of security? Why does the state appear capable of producing overwhelming security manpower when political power is at stake, yet repeatedly appear stretched when ordinary Nigerians are kidnapped, attacked, or killed?
These are uncomfortable but legitimate questions. They are not an argument against election security. They are an argument for equal value for every Nigerian life.
A country cannot afford to create the impression that the security of the ballot is more important than the security of the child, student, farmer or villager.
There is something deeply unsettling about the brazen display and deployment of state power around a political contest. When the full weight of government machinery appears to descend upon a state for an election, the spectacle can become less reassuring than intimidating.
There is nothing sophisticated or democratic about overwhelming a political environment with an intimidating display of power. It is vulgar. It is excessive. And, if allowed to become the normal language of Nigerian elections, it is shameful.
Nigeria should not have to impress the world with how many security personnel it can deploy around a polling exercise. The mark of a mature democracy is not the number of uniforms surrounding voters. It is the confidence that citizens can choose their leaders freely, without intimidation and without feeling that they are entering a war zone.
Such spectacles risk making Nigeria a laughing stock before the eyes of decent and mature democracies, countries where elections are expected to be contests of ideas, records and popular support rather than demonstrations of raw political power.
Nigeria is too important, and Nigerians have sacrificed too much, to allow democracy to be reduced to such a spectacle.
Osun may be a state, but the warning it carries is national. When political heavyweights descend on a state, governors and lawmakers become deeply involved, enormous security formations are deployed, political operatives become emboldened, and rhetoric grows increasingly combative, an election can begin to resemble a battle for political conquest.
That is where Jankara democracy becomes relevant.
It describes a crude, winner-takes-all political culture in which the objective is no longer simply to persuade voters but to overwhelm every competing force standing between a political establishment and victory.
The danger is not that the APC wants to win.
Of course it does.
The danger is when the pursuit of victory becomes so consuming that every available instrument of political power appears fair game. That is when democracy begins to give way to political domination.
And the principle applies to every party. Whoever controls the machinery of government today may find itself in opposition tomorrow.
There is another attitude Nigerians must resist: the language suggesting that political actors have come to “remove” a sitting governor.
Yes, an incumbent governor can be removed.
But the people must remove him through the ballot. Not thugs. Not political godfathers. Not governors from other states. Not lawmakers. Not security agencies. Not political machines.
If the people of Osun want a change of government, let them vote for it. If they want continuity, let them vote for it. That is democracy.
Osun is not enemy territory. Its citizens are not conquered people. The ballot box is not a battlefield.
The danger becomes greater when political rhetoric crosses the line from competition into demonisation. There have been disturbing allegations of attacks, threats and inflammatory statements directed at political opponents during the Osun contest. Such allegations should be properly investigated.
But the principle is simple: Political opponents are not enemies of Nigeria. A citizen exercising his constitutional right to support a candidate is not a legitimate target for violence. A politician who disagrees with the government is not an enemy of the state. Democracy becomes meaningless when political affiliation becomes a reason for intimidation or violence.
This is why Osun matters beyond Osun.
Nigeria is approaching the 2027 general elections, when the political stakes will be considerably higher. The temptation to deploy every available instrument of political power will also be greater.
If the lesson of Osun becomes that the biggest political machine can mobilise governors, lawmakers, political heavyweights, massive security formations and street-level structures to overwhelm opponents, then Nigerians must ask: What happens when the stakes are the presidency, the National Assembly and control of the Federal Government in 2027?
Nigeria cannot afford elections in which the objective is not merely to win but to crush every obstacle to victory.
Opposition parties must be allowed to exist. Candidates must be allowed to campaign. Supporters must be allowed to assemble. Journalists must be allowed to report. Citizens must be allowed to vote without fear. Security agencies must remain professional, neutral and impartial.
The APC must not be denied its political ambition. Neither should PDP, Accord, ADP, APGA or any other legitimate party.
Every party has the right to mobilise. Every candidate has the right to seek victory.
But there must be a line.
Political power must not become a licence to overwhelm the democratic process itself. If the APC has the better candidate, better message and support of the people, let it win. If another party has stronger support, let that party win.
The demand is simple: Let the people decide freely.
Democracy does not require one party to lose. It requires every party to have a fair opportunity to win.
Nigeria has already paid too high a price for political violence. We have communities battling terrorism and banditry, families living with the fear of kidnapping, students unable to learn or travel with confidence, and farmers afraid to enter their farms. Against that background, Nigeria must be extremely careful not to normalise the transformation of elections into security spectacles and political wars.
Security should protect democracy, not intimidate it. Political power should serve citizens, not subjugate them. Political competition should be about persuasion, not conquest. Victory should come from the ballot, not the overwhelming display of raw state power.
Whoever wins Osun will eventually leave office. Whoever wins 2027 will eventually leave office. But the democratic institutions we damage today may take generations to rebuild.
So let the parties contest. Let their candidates campaign. Let them persuade. Let them mobilise. Let them win or lose. But let them do it fairly.
Because the ultimate winner must not merely be a political party. The ultimate winner must be democracy.
Osun is therefore not just an Osun story. It is a warning about what Nigeria must not allow to become the template for 2027. We must not allow the politics of conquest to replace the politics of consent.
