There are negative vibes emanating from Edo as the state prepares for the governorship election. These vibes are, in fact, ominous, especially in light of the timely warning that was made the week before by eminent scholar, political thinker, and founding national secretary of the Alliance for Democracy (AD), Professor Udenta O. Udenta. Professor Udenta had issued a warning, pointing out that a large number of the political players in the country’s democracy are seriously harming democratic governance and democracy itself. He had asserted that a great deal more people are working to establish a really toxic and authoritarian atmosphere that is choking democracy.

His words bear repeating in part: “A climate of fear, intolerance, and silence has descended on the national political landscape. Civic spaces are shrinking as security agencies unleash venom on labour leaders, journalists, perceived regime opponents, and members of the political opposition. Elections are now between the APC and their cohorts in INEC and the police and the other parties, as was the case in the Imo and Kogi off-season elections, and unless urgent steps are taken, in the upcoming Edo and Ondo governorship contests.”

Looking at the Edo governorship race objectively reveals that some see it as a do-or-die contest that will incarnate Prof. Udenta’s predictions. The right and desire of the people to select their representatives or president/governor lies at the heart of democracy. However, given the relentless drumbeat of war being beaten by political parties and their members, there is little chance that the Edo election will result in a free, fair, and credible process that can produce a satisfactory election result if the trend is not addressed.

The process is already being marred by violence, as evidenced by the death of a police officer when APC-supporting Philip Shaibu returned to Benin as deputy governor after being reinstated. As of right now, no one has been taken into custody or held accountable for the killing of the law enforcement officer who was carrying out his official duty of upholding public order. We learnt that he was married and the father of children who are now stranded. Even worse are the rumoured detention of prominent PDP figures, the purported targeting of many more for potential arrests, and the temporary statewide deployment of shadow police units.

Violence and irregularities have always plagued Nigerian elections. But the true tragedy, however, arises if the lawful electoral security agencies, especially the police and the umpire, INEC, which are in charge of overseeing elections and election security, respectively, were compromised. Many people still harbour concerns that Edo and other off-season elections might not be free and fair because of the shambolic roles that the two played in the general election in 2023.

It was anticipated that the two organisations would turn their suffering and damaged reputations around with these off-season elections, but that doesn’t appear to be the case. Both bodies, especially the police, are already facing accusations of partiality.

The National Peace Committee, headed by former head of state, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, drafted a peace agreement, but the Edo PDP and the governor of Edo state simply refused to sign it. And their unwillingness to sign is not without reason. They accused the police and INEC of supporting the state’s main opposition party, the APC, which the current governor, Godwin Obaseki, formerly belonged to. The PDP, rightly or wrongly, accuses the police of open partisanship, intimidation, and oppressive acts against their members in favour of the APC. This has to be addressed by the force for the sake of its image, democracy, and stability of the polity.

The APC, the Labour Party, and the PDP, which is currently in power in Edo, have a right to hope to win the election, but they must do it fairly and without using unethical tactics. The actual concern is that Edo State’s election rhetoric does not foster a climate of amity and peace that would allow for a free and fair election.

During a national television broadcast rally, for instance, at least one APC chieftain dressed in a police uniform was seen threatening that his party would fight back during the election. Many started to question why a police officer, who may only cast a ballot in elections, would be so politically partisan as to threaten people on behalf of a political party and speak at a rally while wearing a police uniform. If not swiftly checked, the unparalleled and extremely embarrassing impunity could taint the election and lead to rejection of its outcome.

Nonetheless, the police attempted to justify the officer’s actions by calling him an SPY police officer. Even if that were all there was to it, the Nigerian police force produced these specialised officers like him for specialised police work in private organisations, as the police officials said. However, is the purpose of this kind of police training to serve the political agenda of the political party that the officer is affiliated with? The other political parties won’t view it that way, even if the special police officers have the best of intentions.

It is imperative to emphasise that INEC and the police are the only entities vested with legal authority to ensure a free, fair, and credible election. Even for the sake of the optics, these two vital organisations cannot afford any move or inaction that casts doubt on their credibility.

Even though it seems late in the day, INEC and the police need to work to restore confidence in the final lead-up to the election and maintain impartiality. The method of conducting a free, fair, and credible election is more important than the results. Nigerian elections are notoriously messy and opaque, producing the largest number of lawsuits worldwide. The fact is: there won’t be many good grounds to go to the tribunals to contest the results once candidates and their political parties are satisfied with the process.

There is also a crucial function for the president of Nigeria, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu. In order to ensure that a level playing field is created, as required by law and expectant Nigerians, the president has to prevail over the heads of the two main agencies responsible for a fair and credible election: the INEC chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, and the IGP, Kayode Egbetokun, to do their work according to law.

INEC has to adhere to the text and spirit of the Electoral Act 2022, specifically Section 64, Subsection 4, which says, “A collation officer or returning officer at an election shall collate and announce the result of an election, subject to his or her verification and confirmation that the— (a) number of accredited voters stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47 (2) of this Act; and (b) the votes stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60 (4) of this Act.” These explicit provisions require INEC to follow this criteria precedent in the Edo gubernatorial election, which is the posting of results from the polling units in real-time.

Don’t forget, the Electoral Act makes the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) the only means of accreditation before voting. INEC cannot afford to do otherwise.

Per the explicit terms of the electoral act 2022, let the Edo gubernatorial election be transmitted from the polling units, which is established as a condition precedent before the announcement of the results at all levels. This is not insurmountable; in fact, it was achieved in the last Osun governorship election, resulting in a peaceful finish. The 2023 presidential election fiasco, in which INEC claimed that an internet malfunction prevented them from posting results from the polling units in real time, which almost sent the nation into chaos, should be avoided.

Finally, if concrete assurances from INEC and police leadership are received, the PDP and the other parties that declined to sign the peace accord should reevaluate their stand and commit to peace, lest their actions be misinterpreted as hostile, which will further endanger the country’s fledgling democracy.