Electoral tension arises when citizens suspect that outcomes are predetermined, votes altered, institutions compromised.
By Kenneth Chibuogwu Gbandi.
There is a simple truth at the heart of every functioning democracy: when citizens are allowed to choose freely and their votes genuinely count, jubilation replaces anger, legitimacy replaces suspicion, and peace prevails. That was the compelling lesson from the Osun State governorship election. Governor Ademola Adeleke’s re-election was significant not merely because he defeated the candidate of the ruling All Progressives Congress, but because the declared result reflected the electorate’s true intent. Adeleke secured 511,067 votes, ahead of the APC’s Bola Oyebamiji, who received 444,815 votes, whilst the African Democratic Congress candidate, Najeem Salaam, finished third with 17,180 votes. Carrying 19 of the state’s 30 local government areas, the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission was followed by widespread jubilation rather than violence.
That peaceful celebration is the natural consequence of electoral results that is a reflection of people’s choices. Nigerians are not inherently violent, nor do they take to the streets out of an inability to accept defeat. Electoral tension arises when citizens suspect that outcomes are predetermined, votes altered, institutions compromised, or state machinery deployed against their choices. When electoral institutions remain impartial, security agencies act professionally, and political leaders resist the urge to interfere, the public accepts the ballot’s verdict even when their preferred candidate loses.
It is equally important to acknowledge President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s response. Governor Adeleke disclosed that the President called to congratulate him shortly after the declaration a gesture that deserves recognition. In a political culture where incumbency is too often treated as an entitlement to victory, accepting the defeat of the ruling party is a meaningful democratic act. However, the greater test lies ahead. The question is no longer whether Osun can conduct a peaceful election, but whether that democratic restraint can become the national standard when President Tinubu’s own political future is on the ballot in January 2027.
Nigeria must not depend upon miracles to conduct credible elections; free and fair contests should be guaranteed by law, protected by institutions, and defended by public vigilance. What happened in Osun must become a precedent, not an exception. President Tinubu’s administration has attracted serious criticism from citizens struggling under economic hardship, insecurity, rising living costs, and growing distrust in public institutions, alongside legitimate concerns regarding a shrinking political space and defections that threaten a one-party state. Yet history is rarely written in a straight line. In spite of these shortcomings, history may judge him differently if Osun has humbled the excesses of power and reminded the Presidency that democratic legitimacy comes solely from the people.
If the President uses his remaining time in office to strengthen the independence of the electoral commission, protect real-time electronic transmission of results, restrain partisan interference by security agencies, and guarantee that every Nigerian’s choice is respected, then 2027 could become a defining moment. He could write his name in gold not necessarily by winning the election, but by ensuring that Nigeria wins its democracy. The greatest legacy of a democratic leader is not the number of elections his party wins, but the strength of the institutions he leaves behind and his willingness to accept the sovereign judgment of the electorate. Power secured by manipulation produces neither honour nor stability, whereas a transparent election even where the incumbent loses earns a leader a permanent place in history.
Osun must also serve as a wake-up call to the opposition, particularly the African Democratic Congress. Electoral integrity does not remove the obligation to build strong structures, resolve internal differences, mobilise communities, and present a convincing alternative. A fair contest is an opportunity, not a substitute for political organisation. The opposition must learn, rebuild, and unite, but the Federal Government carries the greater constitutional responsibility to guarantee a level playing field. The President must resist pressure from those who believe the survival of the ruling party outweighs the survival of Nigeria’s democracy, making clear that no minister, governor, security official, or party leader has licence to intimidate voters, suppress opposition strongholds, manipulate collation, or interfere with result transmissions.
The Osun election has shown what is possible when the electorate believes its voice has been heard: celebration instead of chaos, music instead of mourning, and relief instead of rage. President Tinubu faces a clear choice between allowing 2027 to become another bitter struggle over disputed figures and weakened institutions, or seizing this moment to establish a new democratic standard where the electorate determines who governs. If he chooses the latter, history may remember him not simply as a politician who mastered the acquisition of power, but as a president who understood the noble responsibility of surrendering power to the sovereign will of the people. The lesson from Osun is unmistakable: when the people’s voices are allowed to count, peace follows. May that lesson guide Nigeria in January 2027.
Hon. Kenneth Chibuogwu Gbandi is the longest-serving former Continental Chairman of Nigerians in Diaspora Organisation Europe (NIDOE), a former member of its Board of Trustees, and a former NIDO Worldwide Coordinating Chairman. He currently serves as Chairman of the African Democratic Congress–Diaspora Network (ADC-DN).
