As Nigeria gradually approaches the 2027 general elections, the country is once again
entering a familiar season of political calculations, shifting alliances, campaign promises
and renewed appeals for public support. Politicians are preparing to convince Nigerians
that they deserve another opportunity to occupy public offices, while political parties are
mobilising their structures to secure electoral victories. Amid this unfolding political
drama, however, one question deserves serious consideration: Have Nigerians learnt
enough from their political experiences to make more discerning choices at the ballot
box?
This question is important because elections are not merely occasions for political
parties to demonstrate their popularity or for candidates to test their electoral strength.
They are opportunities for citizens to determine the direction of their country and decide
who should be entrusted with the responsibility of managing their collective affairs.
Unfortunately, Nigeria's electoral experience has repeatedly shown how primordial
sentiments, including ethnicity, religion, regional loyalty and political affiliations, can
overshadow considerations of competence, integrity, character and the capacity to
deliver good governance.
As the 2027 elections approach, Nigerians must resist the temptation to repeat this
pattern. The country cannot afford another electoral cycle in which sentiments take
precedence over substance, political loyalty becomes more important than
accountability, and the identity of a candidate matters more than what that candidate
brings to the table.
There is nothing inherently wrong with identifying with one's ethnic group, religion,
geographical region or political party. These are aspects of social and political identity
that people are entitled to cherish. The problem arises when such identities become the
overriding considerations in determining who deserves to govern. At that point, electoral
choices cease to be informed decisions about the future of the country and become
exercises in defending primordial interests, sometimes at the expense of the collective
wellbeing of Nigerians.
The reality is that hunger does not recognize ethnicity. Poverty does not discriminate
between Christians and Muslims. Unemployment does not spare people because they come from a particular geopolitical zone. Neither do insecurity, poor healthcare,
inadequate electricity supply, deteriorating infrastructure and the rising cost of living
respect political affiliations.
A Nigerian struggling to feed a family, pay school fees, access affordable healthcare or
keep a small business afloat experience these challenges regardless of the language
spoken at home or the region from which he or she originates. This should be sufficient
reason for voters to reconsider the wisdom of allowing primordial sentiments to
determine their electoral preferences.
Indeed, the consequences of poor electoral choices are not confined to the political
class. They are borne disproportionately by ordinary citizens who must contend with the
consequences of governance decisions long after election campaigns have ended.
Politicians may enjoy the privileges of public office, but it is the ordinary Nigerian who
must endure the consequences of inadequate policies, poor implementation, economic
mismanagement and institutional failures.
This is why the 2027 elections should not be approached as another opportunity to
reward political loyalty or settle ethnic and religious scores. They should be approached
as an exercise in evaluating individuals who seek public office.
Nigerians must interrogate the records of candidates seeking their votes. What have
they achieved in previous public assignments? What is their understanding of the
country's economic challenges? Can they articulate realistic solutions to unemployment,
insecurity, inflation, poor electricity supply and the declining purchasing power of
households? Do they demonstrate respect for democratic institutions, the rule of law
and accountability? Are their campaign promises supported by credible plans, or are
they simply attractive political statements designed to secure votes?
These questions should matter far more than the candidate's ethnic background,
religious identity, political godfather or geographical origin.
Similarly, voters must be wary of politicians who invoke ethnic solidarity or religious
sentiments whenever their records are questioned. Governance is not an ethnic
inheritance, nor is public office a religious entitlement. The responsibility of elected
leaders is to serve the entire population, not merely those who share their ancestry, faith
or political preferences.
It is equally important that Nigerians distinguish between genuine political achievements
and carefully packaged propaganda. The ability to command large crowds, distribute
campaign souvenirs, make generous promises or mobilise influential supporters does
not automatically translate into the capacity to govern effectively. A candidate's
credibility should be established through verifiable records, sound ideas, transparency
and a demonstrable commitment to public service.
Another four years of hardship would be too long and too heavy a burden for millions of
Nigerians already struggling to survive. For households battling rising living costs,
young people searching desperately for employment, businesses struggling against
multiple economic pressures and families worried about their security, the
consequences of another disappointing electoral outcome could be devastating.
This is not to suggest that any candidate can magically resolve all the country's
problems within four years. Nigeria's challenges are complex, deeply rooted and require
sustained institutional reforms, responsible leadership and collective commitment.
However, this reality makes the quality of leadership even more important. Citizens
deserve leaders who understand these challenges, possess credible ideas for
addressing them and are prepared to be held accountable for their decisions.
The electorate must also understand that voting is not an act of permanent loyalty.
Supporting a candidate does not mean surrendering one's right to question that
candidate. Political parties are vehicles for democratic participation, not religious
organizations demanding unquestioning allegiance. Likewise, ethnic and regional
identities should never become excuses for defending poor performance.
Nigerians must therefore resist political manipulation that encourages them to defend
candidates simply because they belong to their ethnic group, worship in their religious
congregation or represent their geographical region. A candidate who fails to meet
reasonable standards of leadership should be subjected to scrutiny, irrespective of
identity. Conversely, a candidate should not be dismissed merely because he or she
comes from a different ethnic, religious or regional background.
Ultimately, the future of Nigeria cannot be secured through sentimental attachments to
individuals or political parties. It requires citizens who are willing to place the national
interest above narrow affiliations and demand accountability from those seeking their
mandate.
As 2027 approaches, Nigerians must remember that the ballot is not a ceremonial
instrument for expressing ethnic pride, religious loyalty or partisan devotion. It is a
powerful democratic instrument through which citizens influence the quality of
governance they receive.
The choice before the electorate is therefore bigger than party colours, campaign
slogans and familiar political alliances. It is about the kind of leadership Nigerians want
and the standards they are prepared to demand from those entrusted with public office.
Four years may appear short in the political calendar, but for a family struggling to
survive, a young graduate without employment or a business owner battling to remain
afloat, four years of poor governance can feel like an eternity.
Nigerians must not allow primordial sentiments to mortgage their collective future. The
2027 elections should be an opportunity for sober reflection, independent judgement
and informed participation. Candidates should be assessed on their merits, records,
character, ideas and capacity to serve.
The country has endured enough challenges to make another four years of avoidable
hardship a burden too heavy to contemplate. The time has come for voters to look
beyond where candidates come from and pay closer attention to what they can
