Nigeria’s election authorities and police have warned they will prosecute politicians whose remarks cross into criminal incitement, a step that could shape the tone of the 2027 race and test whether the state is finally willing to punish elite political violence rhetoric.
Nigeria election officials warn on incitement
The significance is bigger than a warning. In a country where incendiary campaign language has often been treated as routine political theatre, a credible crackdown could reduce the risk of localised violence, protect voter participation and limit the use of intimidation as an electoral tool. If enforced, it would also signal a stronger institutional response to conduct that can raise security costs, disrupt campaigning and undermine confidence in the vote.
INEC said it can issue formal queries and sanction parties under the Code of Conduct for Political Parties, while the police said anyone making statements that threaten public peace would face prosecution. Police spokesperson Anietie Iniedu said: “Incitement is a criminal offence and we will not spare anyone trying to heat up the politics with inciteful comments.”
The move follows a string of remarks that have alarmed civil society and lawyers, including comments from governors, senators and party officials that critics say reference violence or explicitly threaten opponents. Among the examples cited were a warning by Oyo governor Seyi Makinde invoking the “Wild Wild West” era, a call by former NNPP official Buba Galadima for citizens to bring kerosene to polling units in 2027, and a viral video allegedly showing Osun senator Francis Fadahunsi issuing death threats.
The legal backdrop is clear, but enforcement has often been weak. Under the Electoral Act, Section 97(1) bars threats of force or violence during campaigning, while Section 132 criminalises the use or threat of force to influence voting. INEC said the law also allows fines of up to N5 million and 12 months in prison for candidates under Section 96(7), and penalties of N10 million for non-compliant parties on a first offence.
That matters for investors and businesses because election-year instability in Africa’s largest economy tends to spill into consumer activity, logistics and public order, especially in states where local political competition turns volatile. A more disciplined campaign environment would be supportive for operations, although the bigger market risk is not the warning itself but whether it is selective, politicised or ignored.
Civil society groups are pushing for prosecutions rather than more rhetoric. Yiaga Africa’s Samson Itodo said there appeared to be “two separate justice systems” for elites and ordinary citizens, while human rights lawyer Jiti Ogunye argued politicians have kept using threats because they have faced no meaningful consequences. The ruling APC denied encouraging violence and said it preferred to campaign on its record in office.
For now, the story is about whether Nigeria’s institutions can turn a familiar pre-election pledge into deterrence. A crackdown that reaches senior figures would mark a rare assertion of electoral discipline; a failure to act would reinforce the view that political elites remain above the law, with consequences not just for democracy but for security and economic stability ahead of 2027.
| Entity | Gains | Losses |
|---|---|---|
| INEC and police | ▲Institutional credibility | ▼Political pushback |
| Voters and civil society | ▲Lower violence risk | ▼Fewer tolerance for abuse |
| Law-abiding parties | ▲Fairer contest | ▼Advantage to hardliners |
| Incitement-prone politicians | ▲None | ▼Prosecution risk |
