A Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Nasarawa State University, Keffi, Jideofor Adibe, has raised concerns over citizens’ declining faith in Nigeria’s electoral process and the structural contradictions surrounding local government autonomy, even as legal practitioner John Oloyede warned of democratic retrogression.
Both men spoke on Saturday during Sunrise Daily on Channels Television, monitored by The News Chronicle. The live programme, broadcast from the Lagos studio with participation from Abuja, focused on the local government elections in Rivers State, the Kano State by-elections, and the FCT council polls held on February 21, 2026.
Opening the discussion, Adibe was asked to assess the electoral process and the broader build-up to local government autonomy. He said a key challenge remains public distrust.
According to him, many Nigerians do not believe their votes will count, a perception that continues to undermine participation at the grassroots. Beyond distrust in outcomes, he argued that the idea of local government is not deeply embedded in citizens’ consciousness.
“You see governors and presidents regularly, but you hardly see local government officials,” he noted, suggesting that limited visibility weakens civic engagement and accountability at that level.
Adibe also pointed to constitutional ambiguities. Referring to Schedule Four of the 1999 Constitution, he explained that there are no clearly defined exclusive functions reserved solely for local governments. Most responsibilities are either shared with states or subject to state oversight. Even with the July 2024 Supreme Court ruling affirming local government financial autonomy, he maintained that councils still function largely as appendages in practice.
He further cited the speed with which electronic voting legislation was assented to, despite objections from some civil society groups, as part of broader political developments fueling skepticism about democratic consolidation.
On citizen participation, Adibe argued that Nigeria’s political environment often discourages meaningful engagement. In descriptive political reality, he said, systems tend to close ranks, and without space for contestation, progress becomes difficult.
He added that participating in politics in Nigeria demands not only financial resources but also a willingness to endure significant personal costs. While it is common to urge “good people” to enter politics, he stressed that structural pressures within the system can overwhelm even well-intentioned actors.
On the question of whether Nigeria’s challenges are rooted in leadership, systems, or the people, Adibe emphasised their interconnectedness. A system, he explained, is not merely an abstract design but a set of practices that have endured over time. Once behaviours are repeated and normalised, they become institutionalised.
He also cautioned against reducing the debate to generational slogans. Recalling that many leaders in the First and Second Republics were relatively young, he said age alone does not determine performance. Catchphrases such as “Not Too Young to Run” or “Not Too Old to Run” may be politically appealing, but they do not address deeper structural constraints.
On political culture, Adibe highlighted the gap between descriptive and normative cultures. While democratic ideals are often proclaimed, actual practices frequently diverge. As societies evolve, cultures shift, but entrenched political “must-dos” and “don’ts” can make reform difficult.
Responding to questions on voter turnout and the resources expended in organising the elections, Oloyede expressed concern that participation might fall below expectations. He attributed this partly to statements by major political actors that appear to downplay the importance of the contests.
He described the situation as troubling, especially at a time when Nigeria should be strengthening democratic institutions, including ushering in leadership at the electoral management level. Instead, he warned, the country risks retrogressing democratically.
On the broader issue of governance failure, Oloyede argued that the problem permeates every layer of the system. According to him, leadership cannot be entirely divorced from the society that produces it.
“The leaders we have cannot be better than we are,” he suggested, noting that systems are ultimately made up of people whose values and conduct shape institutional outcomes.
On the implementation of full local government autonomy, Oloyede identified political will as the primary obstacle. He traced the formal definition of the three tiers of government to 1976 and said Nigeria’s recurring difficulty has been institutionalising democracy in practice rather than on paper.
Adibe, however, challenged the assumption that autonomy alone would automatically deliver grassroots development. He argued that the premise that financial independence will naturally translate into progress is overly simplistic.
Referring to the State Joint Local Government Account system introduced at the start of the Fourth Republic, he said the concept itself may have been well intentioned, but its implementation generated controversy. He further observed that between 1999 and 2001, when allocations were reportedly paid directly to local governments, the expected transformation at the grassroots was not evident.
For both analysts, the debate underscored a broader reality: Nigeria’s democratic challenges are multifaceted. Trust deficits, constitutional design, political culture, institutional practice, and leadership quality are deeply intertwined. Without addressing these structural and cultural dimensions, they implied, electoral exercises at any tier may continue to struggle for legitimacy and impact.
