 |
| Ramatu Ada Ochekliye, Founder of Shades of Us, and Yecenu Sasetu, anchor of the WADR Democracy and Governance Forum in Abuja |
Nigeria’s electoral process has faced persistent questions about electoral credibility, public trust, and citizens’ confidence in the institutions responsible for conducting elections. Although electoral reforms, including the introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), raised expectations for greater transparency, concerns surrounding the 2023 general elections left questions about the management of results and the accountability of electoral institutions. As the country approaches the 2027 general elections, these concerns intersect with growing voter apathy, political disillusionment, economic hardship, insecurity, and doubts about whether electoral participation translates into meaningful political representation.
The figures reflect this decline. According to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), presidential election turnout fell from 53.7 per cent in 2011 to 43.6 per cent in 2015, 34.7 per cent in 2019, and 26.7 per cent in 2023. This pattern raises questions about more than citizens’ willingness to vote. It points to the need to examine public confidence in electoral institutions, the perceived value of political participation, and whether elected leaders are responsive to citizens’ needs. For those of us whose efforts to vote in 2019 and 2023 were frustrated by the electoral process, the question of whether our votes count is deeply personal. I know what it feels like to make the effort to participate and still be unable to cast your vote. Experiences like these can erode confidence in the electoral process and make it harder to convince people to keep participating.
As Nigeria prepares for another general election, addressing voter apathy requires understanding why many citizens are withdrawing from the process and what it will take to restore confidence in democratic participation.
On September 24, 2026, West Africa Democracy Radio (WADR), with support from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), convened the WADR Democracy and Governance Forum in Abuja. The forum brought together democracy advocates, journalists, civil society representatives, public affairs analysts, and other stakeholders to examine Nigeria’s democratic process under the theme, Nigeria’s Democratic Process: Accountability, Security and Electoral Integrity.
The discussions examined the state of Nigeria’s electoral institutions, the relationship between security and political participation, the responsibility of the media, and the barriers that continue to exclude women, young people, and persons with disabilities from democratic processes.
The opening session was moderated by Atiewin Mbillah and Yecenu Sasetu, both of WADR. Agnes E. John-Thomasi, Managing Director of WADR, delivered the welcome remarks, followed by statements on electoral preparedness and democracy and governance.
Mrs. Helen O. Ajayi, Director of the Planning and Monitoring Department at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) headquarters in Abuja, addressed electoral preparedness, while Dr. Garuba Dauda, Executive Director of the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), spoke on democracy and governance.
The discussions raised questions about the relationship between political power and wealth, the credibility of elections, and the reforms required to strengthen democratic participation.
One of the issues highlighted was the unresolved public concern surrounding the glitches experienced during the 2023 general elections. Although the Electoral Act of 2022 introduced innovations that encouraged Nigerians to participate, questions about the performance of the electoral technology and the explanations provided to citizens remain important to restoring confidence in the process.
South Africa was cited as an example of how an independent investigation into electoral technology failures can help establish accountability, with the public receiving information alongside the relevant authorities.
The session also emphasised that electoral reform must connect with broader economic reforms. Democratic participation must be meaningful, safe, and inclusive, while civic education must extend beyond voting to help citizens understand how governance affects their everyday lives.
Development partners were also encouraged to support peer learning across the region, allowing countries to learn from one another’s experiences and strengthen their democratic processes.
Dr. Abubakar Muhammad Kudu, a veteran journalist and broadcaster with 35 years of media experience and a member of the WADR Board, delivered the keynote address, highlighting the significance of the decisions Nigeria would make in the months leading up to the 2027 general elections.
He emphasised that the decisions taken during this period would influence Nigeria’s democratic reputation for years to come. As he put it, “Democracy without accountability is a transaction without receipts.”
Dr. Kudu identified public trust as a major challenge despite ongoing electoral preparations. He highlighted the need to address irregularities in the voter register, including duplicate entries and deceased voters, and stressed that INEC must be transparent about the process of cleaning up the register.
He also raised concerns about funding, the need to strengthen electoral administration from beginning to end, and the importance of ensuring that the commission has the resources required to conduct credible elections.
Electoral integrity, he noted, remains central to the process. The BVAS and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) are important to public confidence, making their effective deployment and the transparent management of results critical.
While I agreed with his premise, I was worried about the recent controversy around the BVAS and IReV. Although the Electoral Act 2026 retains BVAS and mandates electronic transmission of polling-unit results to IReV, new procedures introduced by INEC in the 2026 Electoral Act have raised concerns among civil society organisations. These include an electronic version of Form EC8A on BVAS and a backend validation process before results appear on IReV. Critics argue that the commission has not adequately explained how these procedures work or how discrepancies between different versions of results will be resolved. The debate highlights a central challenge for the 2027 elections: electoral technology can strengthen transparency only when the processes governing its use are clear, verifiable, and open to public scrutiny.
Security was another concern raised by Dr. Kudu. He cautioned against excessive deployment of security personnel during elections, emphasising that security agencies must remain neutral and professional, protecting citizens rather than politicians. He also commended the preparations he observed during the off-cycle elections in Anambra and Osun states.
One point that particularly stayed with me was his observation that Nigeria is among the few countries that shut down economic activities during elections. He argued that the country should be able to maintain peace and security, conduct its electoral processes, and allow economic activities to continue. Elections should not require the country to grind to a halt. The challenge is to create the conditions for citizens to vote safely while businesses, livelihoods, and essential services continue to function.
With the Electoral Act 2026 now law, he acknowledged that concerns remain about aspects of the electoral framework and its implementation. He further called on INEC to maintain neutrality, the media to serve as a watchdog against misinformation, and political leaders to recognise that democratic leadership requires accountability.
As elections become increasingly visible to international audiences through live reporting and digital platforms, the conduct of Nigeria’s 2027 elections will also shape perceptions of the country’s democratic maturity.
The first panel examined Nigeria’s electoral process, democratic participation, and the challenges affecting credible elections. Moderated by Atiewin Mbillah and Yecenu Sasetu, the session brought together veteran journalist Topsy Gimba, public affairs analyst Jide Ojo, and Ene Obi, Executive Director of the Ene Obi Center for Development (ECD).
Topsy Gimba examined recent electoral reforms, voter participation, amendments to the Electoral Act, and growing voter apathy. He expressed concern about corruption, the conduct of political actors, and the apparent regression in Nigeria’s democratic reform efforts. Reflecting on reforms initiated under the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, including the Uwais-led electoral reform process, he observed that Yar’Adua had acknowledged flaws in the process that brought him to power and sought to address them. Yet, as Gimba put it, “Yet now, we are regressing.”
He also questioned the integrity of the legislative process, alleging that “Laws are passed before they are presented in the house if they are said to be from the executive branch.” On electoral technology, he recalled that BVAS was introduced to strengthen accountability but argued that “The money set aside to buy BVAS was wasted when they discarded them and didn’t use them correctly.”
Gimba also addressed the pressures facing the media. He captured the consequences of media censorship in a pointed statement: “The problem with media censorship is that the piper dictates the tune.” Financial difficulties, unpaid media organisations, and restrictions on journalists can compromise independent reporting. He reminded participants that “Media was not meant to be traded, right from the onset. We need to do more.”
During the discussion on the media’s role in accountability, participants considered the need for programmes that address gaps in public understanding, stronger thought leadership from columnists and media professionals, and communication that connects electoral issues to citizens’ lived experiences. Gimba stressed that media professionals must produce programmes that address these gaps and “ensure our programs are connecting with the people.”
Jide Ojo, a public affairs analyst, examined how economic challenges, insecurity, and constitutional issues affect democratic participation and credible elections. He warned that “Security, constitutionality and political participation are interwoven.” Reflecting on developments ahead of the 2027 general elections, he admitted, “I have been chronicling developments as we build up to 2027. And it has me worried.”
Ojo argued that the challenge extends beyond the provisions of the law to the people responsible for implementing it. As he explained, “The problem with the electoral act is not the law per se. It is the operators and how they implement it.” He described the broader political challenge in even sharper terms: “We are running democracy without democrats.”
He questioned whether political leaders were committed to addressing insecurity, economic hardship, and constitutional reform, arguing that “our political class is more interested in state capture.” Concerns about INEC’s resources also informed his intervention. He questioned the implications of reports that the commission might lack the resources required for the coming elections, asking, “Are we deliberately orchestrating failure in our systems?”
On voter apathy, Ojo challenged the widespread belief that votes do not count. “We must stop saying your votes do not count. If they do not, why do they steal them? Why do they buy it? Why do they prevent you from doing it?” His remarks raised questions about the relationship between public confidence, electoral malpractice, and citizens’ willingness to participate.
Ene Obi, Executive Director of the Ene Obi Center for Development, focused on political violence, public confidence in elections, and the responsibility of citizens and institutions to strengthen democracy. She reflected on what sustains civic engagement, explaining, “But we must always ask what keeps us going. For me, it is the love for country, the love for my continent.”
Obi emphasised the need for accountability among political leaders and institutions, particularly the judiciary and INEC. She described “The lifeblood of democracy” as “active citizens” and called for a renewed commitment to building a country in which public institutions serve citizens and answer for their actions.
Addressing voter apathy, she pointed to the importance of citizens seeing credible electoral processes in practice. “When people see success, it can bring trust,” she said, referring to Osun State’s election as an example. She also noted that young Nigerians had begun to trust the electoral process again in 2023 because of BVAS, underscoring how confidence in electoral technology can influence participation.
The panel highlighted the interconnected challenges of electoral credibility, political accountability, economic hardship, insecurity, media independence, and public trust. Across their contributions, the speakers returned to a common concern: democratic institutions must function transparently, political actors must be held accountable, and citizens must be able to see the value of participating in the electoral process.
During the question-and-answer session, someone raised a concern about the growing disillusionment among young Nigerians, a question I had written down to ask myself.
We are old enough to care about our country. Yet many young people have grown up without experiencing a Nigeria that consistently (if ever) works for them. The disappointment surrounding the last general elections deepened this disillusionment, while poor civic education and limited participation have further weakened their connection to the democratic process. How could we get young people to care?
The question was part of the wider conversation about voter apathy, citizen responsibility, and the need to strengthen democratic participation. It also highlighted the importance of moving beyond assumptions about young people's attitudes and examining the experiences that shape their relationship with governance.
Civic education must help citizens understand the connection between elections, public accountability, and their everyday lives. Participation must also extend beyond voting to include the ability to question decisions, demand answers, and influence the institutions responsible for public service.
The second panel examined the participation of groups that continue to face barriers to political representation, particularly women, young people, and persons with disabilities. Usman Umar and Veronic Njie of WADR moderated the session.
The speakers were Chioma Adaobi Oti, Executive Director of the Women Leadership Institute; Lois Auta, Founder and Executive Director of Cedar Seed Foundation; Nankpak Cirfat, Communications Associate for Media Relations at Connected Development (CODE); and Dr. Chike Okogbu, Founder of CARE and associated with the political party, African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Chioma Adaobi Oti highlighted the gap between women's share of Nigeria's population and their representation in elected offices. “Although women account for roughly half the population, our representation in political leadership remains low.” She argued that this underrepresentation reflects a governance system that does not adequately include women in decision-making.
Oti also highlighted efforts to strengthen women's leadership through training and masterclasses for women and young girls. Such initiatives provide opportunities to develop the skills and capacity required for leadership and political participation.
Her contribution reinforced the need to move beyond acknowledging women's importance to ensuring that they have meaningful opportunities to contest elections and occupy decision-making positions.
Lois Auta drew attention to the multiple barriers faced by persons with disabilities, particularly women and girls, in political representation and civic participation. She referenced protections contained in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Nigerian Constitution, the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act, and INEC provisions intended to prevent discrimination. Despite these frameworks, she noted that women with disabilities remain severely underrepresented.
Drawing on her own experience, Auta recounted attempting to contest for political office but being asked by party gatekeepers to step down. She also described having to “petition party officials to secure the inclusion of women with disabilities in a list of representatives.”
She pointed to the example of a visually impaired woman, Senator Crystal Asige, serving as a senator in Kenya to demonstrate that political representation by persons with disabilities is possible.
Her contribution highlighted the difference between having legal protections and being able to exercise the rights those protections are intended to guarantee.
Nankpak Cirfat challenged participants to consider what inclusion means in practice. “The presence of policies and public commitments does not automatically translate into inclusive decision-making.” Cirfat questioned how effectively decision-makers can account for the experiences of persons with disabilities when people with disabilities are often absent from the spaces where decisions are made.
The contribution placed representation at the centre of the inclusion debate. People affected by decisions must have opportunities to participate in making them.
Dr. Chike Okogbu reinforced the principle that persons with disabilities are part of the population that democracy must represent.
He introduced five elements of inclusion: Presence, Participation, Power, Policy and Prosperity.
Presence means that people must have access to decision-making spaces. Participation requires that they can engage meaningfully in the process. Power refers to their ability to influence decisions and bring about change. Policy must respond to their rights and needs, while prosperity concerns their ability to benefit from the outcomes of governance.
Okogbu stressed that the existence of policies is not enough when people lack the power to influence their implementation. He also addressed the barriers created by party politics and noted that persons with disabilities have the right to challenge exclusion through the courts.
His contribution emphasised that inclusion cannot depend on goodwill alone. It requires people to exercise their rights and institutions to respect them.
The question-and-answer session broadened the discussion beyond formal representation to examine the practical challenges of inclusion.
Dorothy Njemanze of the Dorothy Njemanze Foundation raised the importance of understanding disability in an all-encompassing way, including disabilities and support needs that may not be immediately visible. The discussion also touched on the language used to describe experiences related to sexual and gender-based violence and how language can contribute to exclusion.
A representative of Kiss FM raised a question about women's participation and what could be done to encourage more women to engage in political processes.
A representative of Lawyers for the Defense of Democracy highlighted the use of young people as instruments of political violence, raising further questions about their place in electoral processes and the conditions that shape their participation.
Dr. Garuba Dauda returned to the question of inclusion, drawing attention to the intersections of youth, sex, and ability. His contribution raised the need to examine whether existing approaches to participation adequately account for these different experiences.
Participants also discussed how to reach persons with disabilities, including the opportunity for people to update their disability status in relevant registries.
Another contribution returned to the need for better-informed young citizens. The discussion called for an informed citizen model that encourages people to seek information, deliberate on public issues, and evaluate the decisions and actions of political actors.
Together, these questions highlighted the distinction between inviting people to participate and creating the conditions that allow them to do so meaningfully.
The forum concluded with a presentation of key recommendations arising from the speakers' contributions and discussions. Deborah Amuwo of WADR served as rapporteur.
Across the day's sessions, participants examined the relationship between electoral integrity, public accountability, security, media independence, and inclusive political participation. The discussions also reinforced the importance of civic education, independent journalism, accountable institutions, and citizens who understand their rights and responsibilities.
As Nigeria approaches the 2027 general elections, these issues remain central to the country's democratic future. At Shades of Us, we stand firmly on the idea that credible elections require more than the organisation of polling activities. They require institutions that earn public trust, political actors who accept accountability, and electoral processes that allow citizens to participate freely and meaningfully.
The WADR Democracy and Governance Forum provided a space for stakeholders to examine these challenges and discuss the responsibilities involved in strengthening Nigeria's democracy.
The next step is to translate these conversations into action, with accountability and inclusion remaining central to the process.
No comments:
Post a Comment