Senate President Godswill Akpabio has stepped into the role of seer, declaring that the insecurity ravaging Nigeria will end after the 2027 elections. He was quoted as saying the recent upsurge is politically motivated ahead of the polls, aimed at discrediting President Bola Tinubu, and that “two weeks after the general elections, the attacks and bombing would fizzle out.” Speaking at the commissioning of a tax facility in Abuja, he argued that rising insecurity should be viewed within the context of political activities gathering momentum, insisting some actors are deliberately sponsoring unrest to distract the administration. Confident the situation would ease post-election, he added: “As soon as elections are over, watch out, the first few weeks, you may not hear of such incidents again.”
Akpabio linked the attacks to opposition discomfort with Tinubu’s growing acceptance across party lines, noting the president now influences close to 30 governors. He signaled strong backing for Tinubu’s re-election, saying “Nigerians cannot do without you in 2027,” and defended reforms like subsidy removal and tax restructuring as necessary to stabilize public finances. He assured the National Assembly would keep supporting the administration’s policies while urging patience as reforms take root.
While prophets now crowd political prophecy with conflicting visions, Akpabio’s descent into it, even unconsciously, carries disappointment if not tragedy. Unlike prophets, he bears responsibility to end insecurity before then. To many, it insults privilege and patronage when he seems to forget that, even if he doesn’t see himself or his relatives as victims, he is normalizing a fate for others and projecting helplessness, regardless of the daily casualties expected to last another year. Critics read it as a dismissal and mockery of victims, and an indirect admission of incapacity to end anything other than a natural disaster. His posture treats insecurity as inevitable when elections approach, strengthening conspiracy theories and raising questions about leadership effectiveness when leaders themselves appear helpless.
Yet beyond the emotional outbursts and lack of moderation, the stark reality in the message cannot be ignored. When Tinubu took office, security improved despite immediate hardship. Shehu Sani once noted that insecurity under Buhari was worse than under Tinubu. While banditry marked Buhari’s government, Boko Haram insurgency and killings of military personnel had declined, with suicide attacks almost absent from the news. Suddenly, as the political movement heated up, these attacks returned as the order of the day. No reasonable doctor would dismiss physical symptoms as a mere coincidence when the history and inconsistency in their manifestations are this clear.
Still, even without proof for what looks like prophecy and conspiracy narratives from high places, the emotionally charged environment on social media, where netizens legitimize mob action, bullying, stereotyping, hate, and offensive comments against perceived enemies, cannot guarantee security. The desperation to use tragedies to vindicate government failure and stoke fear about why leaders must be replaced at all costs adds to this perception. Whispers as senseless as they seem that new Plateau attacks happened because the government defected to the APC, emerge when anti-government sentiment is high nationwide, even if sharper in some places than others.
Definitely, without checking emotions and watching speech and conduct, often validated as sacred with moral superiority of “saints” against “sinners,” rising pre-election and post-election violence remains a stark reality, as it was before and after the 2011 presidential elections in Nigeria.
Bagudu can be reached via bagudumohammed15197@gmail.com or 07034943575.
